in Re Kenneth Crissup
This text of in Re Kenneth Crissup (in Re Kenneth Crissup) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-12-00761-CV
In re Kenneth Crissup
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Kenneth Crissup, an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West
2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. In his petition, Crissup asks us to issue a writ of mandamus
directed to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and certain named employees.
This Court does not have mandamus jurisdiction over the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice or personnel thereof. By statute, this Court has the authority to issue a writ of
mandamus against “a judge of a district or county court in the court of appeals district” and other
writs as necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221. The
Texas Department of Criminal Justice and its employees are not parties against whom we may issue
a writ of mandamus. Nor has Crissup demonstrated that the exercise of our writ power is necessary
to enforce our jurisdiction. We have no jurisdiction to grant Crissup the relief he seeks.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. __________________________________________ J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin
Dismissed For Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: November 30, 2012
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Kenneth Crissup, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kenneth-crissup-texapp-2012.