IN RE: THE STATE OF TEXAS, EX REL. STEPHEN B. TYLER, CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF VICTORIA COUNTY, TEXAS--Appeal from 135th District Court of Victoria County

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-09-00380-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE THE STATE OF TEXAS EX REL. STEPHEN B. TYLER, CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF VICTORIA COUNTY, TEXAS On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion 1 Relator, the State of Texas ex rel. Stephen B. Tyler, Criminal District Attorney of Victoria County, Texas, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on July 7, 2009. The Court requested and received a response to the petition for writ of mandamus from the City of Victoria, the real party in interest. 1 See T EX. R. A PP. P. 52 .8 (d ) ( W h e n d e nying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so. ); T EX. R. A PP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). Mandamus relief may be granted if the relator shows that: (1) the act sought to be compelled is purely ministerial; and (2) there is no adequate remedy at law. See Deleon v. Dist. Clerk, 187 S.W.3d 473, 474 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (orig. proceeding). The relator must have a clear right to the relief sought and the merits of the relief sought must be beyond dispute. See id. The requirement of a clear legal right necessitates that the law plainly describes the duty to be performed such that there is no room for the exercise of discretion. Id. Mandamus may also issue to correct a void order. See, e.g., State ex rel. Millsap v. Lozano, 692 S.W.2d 470, 482 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the response thereto, is of the opinion that relator has not shown himself entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). PER CURIAM Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this 29th day of July, 2009. 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.