In Re: Kirkland Warren v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 22, 2024
Docket12-24-00012-CR
StatusPublished

This text of In Re: Kirkland Warren v. the State of Texas (In Re: Kirkland Warren v. the State of Texas) 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.

Bluebook
In Re: Kirkland Warren v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

NO. 12-24-00012-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS INRE: § KIRKLAND WARREN, § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING § RELATOR MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM

Kirkland Warren, acting pro se, filed this original proceeding to seek a writ compelling Respondent to conduct a new punishment hearing in accordance with this Court’s judgment of September 22, 2022.' This Court remanded Relator’s case for a new punishment hearing because of an inaccurate punishment record. See Warren v. State, Nos. 12-22-00005-CR & 12- 22-00006-CR, 2022 WL 4394559, at *1, 4-5 (Tex. App.—Tyler Sept. 22, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). The online Smith County records indicate that a bench trial was held on December 8, 2022, and Relator was sentenced to twenty-five years in prison. And

Relator’s appendix contains a nunc pro tunc judgment dated December 8, in which Relator was

1 Respondent is the Honorable Austin R. Jackson, Judge of the 114” District Court in Smith County, Texas. The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest. sentenced to twenty-five years in prison. Thus, it appears that a punishment hearing has

occurred.” Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

Opinion delivered February 22, 2024. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

? We also note that on January 29, 2024, the Clerk of this Court informed Relator that his petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52.3(a)-(h) and (j)-(k) and 52.7. See TEX. R. App. P. 52.3 (form and contents of petition); TEX. R. App. P. 52.7 (record). The notice warned that the petition would be referred to this Court for dismissal unless Relator provided the record and an amended petition on or before February 8. Relator did not file a record or an amended petition. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

FEBRUARY 22, 2024

NO. 12-24-00012-CR

KIRKLAND WARREN, Relator V.

HON. JUDGE AUSTIN R. JACKSON, Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by

Kirkland Warren; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00012-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 114-1929-20, formerly pending on the docket of the 114th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on January 29, 2024, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the writ should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denied.

By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C_J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re: Kirkland Warren v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kirkland-warren-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.