In Re Samantha RaeJon Downs v. the State of Texas

Opinion

In the

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-25-00120-CV

IN RE SAMANTHA RAEJON DOWNS

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Samantha RaeJon Downs has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus asking this Court to compel the Honorable R. Wesley Tidwell, presiding judge of the 6th Judicial District Court of Red River County, Texas, to vacate temporary orders entered in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. We deny Downs’s requested relief since her petition does not meet the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

A petition seeking mandamus relief must contain a certification stating that the relator “has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). Although Downs’s petition includes an unsworn declaration “that the facts stated in this Petition for Writ of Mandamus are true and correct,” she does not certify that she “has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record,” or language substantially similar. Id.

Additionally, Rule 52.7(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure requires a relator to file with her petition for a writ of mandamus “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1). The documents attached to Downs’s petition are neither certified nor sworn and appear to contain matters not filed in the underlying proceeding. “‘Because the record in a mandamus proceeding is assembled by the parties,’ we must ‘strictly enforce[] the authentication requirements of rule 52 to ensure the integrity of the mandamus record.’” In re Long, 607 S.W.3d 443, 445 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2020, orig. proceeding) (alteration in

3

original) (quoting In re Smith, No. 05-19-00268-CV, 2019 WL 1305970, at *1 (Tex. App.— Dallas Mar. 22, 2019, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)).

Because Downs did not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we deny her petition for a writ of mandamus.1

Charles van Cleef

Justice

Date Submitted: November 24, 2025 Date Decided: November 25, 2025

1 Because we deny Downs’s petition, we overrule her request for emergency relief as moot.