In Re Eric Dwayne Stevenson--Appeal from 435th District Court of Montgomery County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-11-00499-CV _________________ IN RE ERIC DWAYNE STEVENSON ________________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION On September 8, 2011, Eric Dwayne Stephenson petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to issue a new docket control order in a sexually violent predator commitment case. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 190.5(b) (The court must allow additional discovery regarding matters that have changed materially after the discovery cutoff if trial is set or postponed so that the trial date is more than three months after the discovery period ends. ). Relator requested a stay of the trial scheduled for September 12, 2011. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10. The discovery period ended June 8, 2011. Relator did not designate an expert witness. The jury failed to reach a verdict at trial. The trial court declared a mistrial on 1 August 11, 2011, and reset the trial for September 12, 2011. Relator requested a new docket control order to allow designation of an expert witness that had not been previously designated. Counsel for relator explained that relator was changing his trial tactics. On August 23, 2011, the trial court denied Relator s motion for a new docket control order. Mandamus will issue only to correct a clear abuse of discretion when that abuse cannot be remedied by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135-36 (Tex. 2004); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex. 1992). After reviewing the mandamus record and petition, we conclude that Relator has failed to establish an abuse of discretion by the trial court for which an appeal would not be an adequate remedy. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for temporary relief. PETITION DENIED. PER CURIAM Opinion Delivered September 9, 2011 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 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.
