In re Robert Rodriguez Appeal from 437th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-19-00758-CR IN RE Robert RODRIGUEZ Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Delivered and Filed: November 13, 2019 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On October 25, 2019, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus asking this court to order the district clerk to “perform her duty and forward relator’s pro-se motions for a judicial decision where more than 60 days have elapsed and no decision [has] been rendered.” By statute, an appellate court has the power to issue a writ of mandamus against a district or county court judge. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221(b). An appellate court may also issue a writ of mandamus to enforce its jurisdiction. See id. § 22.221(a). This court does not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk or a court reporter unless such writ is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding) (per curiam). Relator has not asserted that the writ he is requesting is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction, nor has This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2019-CR-10734, 2019-CR-10735, NM526505, 1990-CR-1294, styled The State of Texas v. Robert Rodriguez, pending in the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela presiding. 1 04-19-00758-CR he provided a record that would support such an argument. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (holding relator has burden of providing a sufficient record to establish right to mandamus relief). Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed. PER CURIAM Do not publish -2-

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.