in Re Terry Helmcamp

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ___________________

NO. 09-17-00011-CR ___________________

IN RE TERRY HELMCAMP __________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding 435th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 12-01-00757 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Terry Helmcamp filed a pro se petition for writ of prohibition, in

which he argues that the waiver, consent, judicial confession, and plea agreement he

signed in accordance with his guilty plea are illegal and unconstitutional.

Specifically, Helmcamp asserts that (1) he waived his constitutional right to trial

under duress, (2) the State failed to allow him access to exculpatory evidence in

violation of the Michael Morton Act, and (3) the State coerced him to waive his right

to service of a copy of the indictment. Helmcamp asks this Court to “prohibit” said

allegedly unlawful and unconstitutional actions.

1 A writ of prohibition directs a lower court to refrain from doing some act. In

re Lambert, 993 S.W.2d 123, 126 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, orig. proceeding).

A writ of prohibition will only issue to prevent the threatened commission of a future

act; that is, it will not issue to undo an act that has already been performed. State ex

rel. Rodriguez v. Onion, 741 S.W.2d 433, 435 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987). The relief

Helmcamp seeks pertains to actions that have already occurred, and such relief is

not consistent with a request for a writ of prohibition. See id. Accordingly, we deny

Helmcamp’s petition for a writ of prohibition.

PETITION DENIED.

Submitted on January 24, 2017 Opinion Delivered January 25, 2017 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.