In Re Tyrond Dwayne Richard v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Opinion issued December 23, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

that “the respondent ha[d] not transmitted the writ to the Court of Criminal

Appeal[s].” Relator’s letter-motion failed to identify the respondent, but “ask[ed]

that this Honorable Court of Appeal[s] compel the lower court to perform [its] duty.”

Relator did not file a petition for writ of mandamus.

It is not necessary to file a motion for leave before filing a petition for writ of

mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1. This Court cannot grant mandamus relief

without a petition for writ of mandamus that complies with the requirements of the

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Accordingly, we deny relator’s letter-motion for failure to comply with the

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1, 52.3, 52.7. We

dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Dokupil.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-25-01046-CR ——————————— IN RE TYROND DWAYNE RICHARD, Relator Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Tyrond Dwayne Richard, incarcerated and proceeding pro se, filed a letter-motion stating that he was “request[ing] . . . leave to file [a petition for writ of] mandamus.”1 Relator’s letter-motion stated that on November 3, 2025, he “mailed a subsequent application under Article 11.07 to wit: wrongful imprisonment,” but 1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Tyrond Dwayne Richard, Cause Number 1336435, pending in the 180th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Tami Pierce presiding.