In re Taurus Brown--Appeal from 218th Judicial District Court of Karnes County
Annotate this CaseNo. 04-07-00245-CV
IN RE Taurus BROWN
Original Mandamus Proceeding (1)
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Rebecca Simmons, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 18, 2007
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
In a petition for a writ of mandamus, Taurus Brown seeks to compel the trial court "to perform [its] ministerial duty and award the back time sentence credit that was agreed upon" in his plea bargain in the underlying criminal proceeding. This court is authorized to issue a writ of mandamus to compel a trial court to consider and rule on a nunc pro tunc motion addressing pre-sentence jail credit. Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148-49 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); In re Isbell, 2006 WL 3206075, at *1 (Tex. App.--San Antonio, November 8, 2006, orig. proceeding). However, a relator has the burden of providing this court with a record sufficient to establish a right to mandamus relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a) ("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"); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j)(1)(A). Here, Brown has not provided this court with a copy of his motion or any other documents to support his claim for relief. Nor has Brown established that the trial court has been made aware of his motion or has expressly refused to rule on it. See In re Isbell, 2006 WL 3206075, at *2 (conditionally granting mandamus relief when the record showed the trial court was made aware of the nunc pro tunc motion but nevertheless failed to consider and rule on it). We conclude that Brown has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition is denied.
PER CURIAM
1. This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 04-02-00012-CRK, styled State of Texas v. Taurus Brown, filed in the 218th Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas, the Honorable Olin B. Strauss presiding.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.