In Re: Tony Traylor, Jr. v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

In Re: Tony Traylor, Jr. v. the State of Texas

DecidedMay 15, 2024

Docket12-24-00080-CR

StatusPublished

This text of In Re: Tony Traylor, Jr. v. the State of Texas (In Re: Tony Traylor, Jr. 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 Traylor, Jr. v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

NOS. 12-24-00080-CR 12-24-00081-CR 12-24-00082-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: §

TONY TRAYLOR, JR., § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Tony Traylor, Jr., acting pro se, filed this original proceeding to challenge Respondent’s failure to rule on his motion for nunc pro tunc judgment and strike cumulative language from the judgment. 1 On April 10, 2024, the Clerk of this Court informed Relator that his petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52.3(a)-(g), 52.7, and 9.5. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3 (contents of petition); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (record); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5 (service). The notice warned that the petition would be referred to this Court for dismissal unless Relator amended the petition to comply with these Rules before May 10. Relator did not file an amended petition, the record, or otherwise respond to this Court’s notice.

1 Respondent is the Honorable Debra E. Gunter, Judge of the 241st District Court of Smith County, Texas. The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest. Generally, a party seeking mandamus relief must bring forward all that is necessary to establish his claim for mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.7 requires the relator to file a record as part of his petition in an original proceeding. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7. Specifically, a relator must file (1) a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to his claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding; and (2) “a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). It is a relator’s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish the right to extraordinary relief. See In re Daisy, No. 12-13-00266-CR, 2014 WL 5577068, at *2 (Tex. App.–Tyler Aug. 29, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). In this case, Relator did not provide a record in accordance with Rule 52.7. Absent a record, we cannot determine whether Relator is entitled to mandamus relief. See In re McCreary, No. 12-15-00067-CR, 2015 WL 1395783 (Tex. App.–Tyler Mar. 25, 2015, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Accordingly, we deny Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Opinion delivered May 15, 2024. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

2 COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

MAY 15, 2024

NO. 12-24-00080-CR

TONY TRAYLOR, JR., Relator V.

HON. JUDGE DEBRA E. GUNTER, Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Tony Traylor, Jr.; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00080-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 241-0709-13, formerly pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on April 10, 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. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

NO. 12-24-00081-CR

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Tony Traylor, Jr.; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00081-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 241-0710-13, formerly pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on April 10, 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. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

NO. 12-24-00082-CR

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Tony Traylor, Jr.; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00082-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 241-0711-13, formerly pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on April 10, 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

NOS. 12-24-00080-CR 12-24-00081-CR 12-24-00082-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: §

TONY TRAYLOR, JR., § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Tony Traylor, Jr., acting pro se, filed this original proceeding to challenge Respondent’s failure to rule on his motion for nunc pro tunc judgment and strike cumulative language from the judgment. 1 On April 10, 2024, the Clerk of this Court informed Relator that his petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52.3(a)-(g), 52.7, and 9.5. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3 (contents of petition); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (record); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5 (service). The notice warned that the petition would be referred to this Court for dismissal unless Relator amended the petition to comply with these Rules before May 10. Relator did not file an amended petition, the record, or otherwise respond to this Court’s notice.

1 Respondent is the Honorable Debra E. Gunter, Judge of the 241st District Court of Smith County, Texas. The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest. Generally, a party seeking mandamus relief must bring forward all that is necessary to establish his claim for mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.7 requires the relator to file a record as part of his petition in an original proceeding. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7. Specifically, a relator must file (1) a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to his claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding; and (2) “a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). It is a relator’s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish the right to extraordinary relief. See In re Daisy, No. 12-13-00266-CR, 2014 WL 5577068, at *2 (Tex. App.–Tyler Aug. 29, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). In this case, Relator did not provide a record in accordance with Rule 52.7. Absent a record, we cannot determine whether Relator is entitled to mandamus relief. See In re McCreary, No. 12-15-00067-CR, 2015 WL 1395783 (Tex. App.–Tyler Mar. 25, 2015, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Accordingly, we deny Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Opinion delivered May 15, 2024. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

2 COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

MAY 15, 2024

NO. 12-24-00080-CR

TONY TRAYLOR, JR., Relator V.

HON. JUDGE DEBRA E. GUNTER, Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Tony Traylor, Jr.; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00080-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 241-0709-13, formerly pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on April 10, 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. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

NO. 12-24-00081-CR

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Tony Traylor, Jr.; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00081-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 241-0710-13, formerly pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on April 10, 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. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

NO. 12-24-00082-CR

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Tony Traylor, Jr.; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00082-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 241-0711-13, formerly pending on the docket of the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on April 10, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

In Re: Tony Traylor, Jr. v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tony-traylor-jr-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.