in Re Lamar Lovett
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-20-00616-CV
In re Lamar Lovett
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Lamar Lovett has filed a petition for writ of mandamus asserting that the trial
court has not ruled on his motion for postconviction DNA retesting and his motion for the
appointment of counsel. Although mandamus may issue to compel a trial court to rule on a
motion, the relator is required to provide a mandamus record establishing that he requested a
ruling on the pending motion. See In re Sarkissian, 243 S.W.3d 860, 861 (Tex. App.—Waco
2008, orig. proceeding) (observing that mandamus record failed to establish that relator
requested ruling or called motion to trial court’s attention and that “mere filing of a motion with
a trial court clerk does not equate to a request that the trial court rule on the motion”); see also
Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a) (requiring relator to file with petition, among other things, “a certified or
sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claims for relief and that was filed
in any underlying proceeding”). Because Lovett has failed to provide a sufficient mandamus
record, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). __________________________________________ Thomas J. Baker, Justice
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Baker and Smith
Filed: January 7, 2021
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
in Re Lamar Lovett (in Re Lamar Lovett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.