IN RE: GILBERTO RODRIGUEZ--Appeal from 347th District Court of Nueces County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-08-00479-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ IN RE GILBERTO RODRIGUEZ ____________________________________________________________ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1 On August 11, 2008, relator, Gilberto Rodriguez, pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to give relator credit on his sentence for the time that relator served from the time of his arrest and confinement until he was sentenced. The trial court has the authority to correct the omission of presentence jail credit through judgment nunc pro tunc. See Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). Mandamus is available to compel the trial court to respond to a nunc pro tunc motion for presentence jail credit. Id. at 149. In this case, however, the petition generally 1 See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(d) ( W hen denying relief, the court m ay hand down an opinion but is not required to do so. ); T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and m em orandum opinions). fails to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3. Further, the relator has not shown that he is entitled to the relief sought or that his motion for a nunc pro tunc judgment awaited disposition for an unreasonable length of time under the circumstances. See Ex parte Bates, 65 S.W.3d 133, 134-35 (Tex. App. Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding). Moreover, relator failed to demonstrate that the act sought to be compelled is purely ministerial and the relator has a clear and indisputable right to relief. See State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. PER CURIAM Do not publish. TEX . R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this 14th day of August, 2008. 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.
