In Re Tony Cervantes v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 28, 2023
Docket03-23-00250-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re Tony Cervantes v. the State of Texas (In Re Tony Cervantes 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 Tony Cervantes v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00250-CV

In re Tony Cervantes

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM MILAM COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Tony Cervantes, an inmate proceeding pro se, has filed with this Court a

putative motion for early termination of the requirement to register as a sex offender under

Chapter 62, Code of Criminal Procedure, complaining of the trial court’s failure to timely rule on

a similar motion allegedly filed with that court on March 6, 2023. We will treat Mr. Cervantes’

submission as a petition for writ of mandamus.

A relator seeking mandamus relief has the burden of providing the Court with a

sufficient record to establish the right to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex.

1992). By rule, the relator must file with the petition “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). Here, Mr. Cervantes has provided no sworn record

or exhibits in support of his submission. Moreover, although mandamus relief is generally

available when the trial court has failed to rule within a reasonable length of time on a properly

filed motion brought to the trial court’s attention, a delay of less than three months is not unreasonable. See In re Whitfield, No. 03-18-00564-CV, 2018 WL 4140735, at *1 (Tex.

App.—Austin Aug. 29, 2018, orig. proceeding); accord In re Ridley, No. 03-22-00259-CV,

2022 WL 1492528, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin May 12, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Accordingly, the petition is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8.

__________________________________________ Gisela Triana, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis

Filed: April 28, 2023

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

Related

Walker v. Packer
827 S.W.2d 833 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re Tony Cervantes v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tony-cervantes-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.