IN RE: WHITNEY G. RICE--Appeal from 117th District Court of Nueces County

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NUMBER 13-09-00582-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE: WHITNEY G. RICE On Petition for Writ of Mandamus MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1 Relator, Whitney G. Rice, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus on October 20, 2009, seeking to compel the District Clerk of Nueces County to comply with her ministerial duties and forward documents pertaining to relator s conviction to the Texas 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). Court of Criminal Appeals.2 The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, is of the opinion that the petition should be denied. This Court does not have mandamus jurisdiction over district clerks unless it is shown that issuance of the writ is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See TEX . GOV T CODE ANN . § 22.221(a), (b) (Vernon 2004); In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding); In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding); see also In re Nubine, No. 13-08-507-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 6534, at *1 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi Aug. 27, 2008, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op). 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 PER CURIAM Do not publish.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 the 18th day of November, 2009. 2 W e note that this petition for writ of m andam us is substantially sim ilar to a petition relator filed on Septem ber 25, 2009. See In re W hitney G. Rice, No. 13-09-00540-CR, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 7671, at *1 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi Sept. 30, 2009, orig. proceeding) (m em o op. per curiam , not designated for publication). 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.