in Re: Troy Alan Stills
This text of in Re: Troy Alan Stills (in Re: Troy Alan Stills) 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.
Opinion
Dismissed in part, Denied in part, and Opinion Filed September 18, 2017
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01079-CV
IN RE TROY ALAN STILLS, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 397th Judicial District Court Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 063589
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Francis, Brown, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Francis In this original proceeding, relator asks this Court to order the trial court to grant certain
motions purportedly pending in the trial court, correct the degree of felony in his conviction, and
reduce his sentence. This proceeding is a collateral attack on a final conviction and, therefore,
falls within the scope of a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07 of the Texas
Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West 2015). Only
the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final, post-conviction felony
proceedings. Id; Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)
(orig. proceeding); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001,
orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we dismiss this proceeding for want of jurisdiction to the extent
relator attacks his final conviction.
To the extent relator seeks only a writ directing the trial court to rule on certain motions,
we deny the petition because relator has not provided the Court with a record establishing that the motions were properly filed and presented to the trial court, relator requested a hearing or
ruling on the motions, and the trial court refused to rule or failed to rule within a reasonable time.
As such, relator is not entitled to mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(a), 52.7(a);
see also In re Harris, No. 14–07–231–CV, 2007 WL 1412105, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th
Dist.] May 15, 2007, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (holding relator not entitled to mandamus
relief when record did not show relator alerted trial court of motion by setting it for submission
or hearing).
/Molly Francis/ MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE
171079F.P05
–2–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re: Troy Alan Stills, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-troy-alan-stills-texapp-2017.