In Re Flavio Lliguisaca--Appeal from 339th District Court of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed February 17, 2011. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________ NO. 14-11-00085-CR ____________ IN RE FLAVIO LLIGUISACA, Relator ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 339th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 725310-A MEMORANDUM OPINION On January 31, 2011, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov t Code Ann. ยง 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. Relator complains that respondent, the Honorable Maria T. Jackson, presiding judge of the 339th District Court of Harris County, has failed to rule in a reasonable time on his motion for DNA testing and appointment of counsel. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig.proceeding). Consideration of a motion that is properly filed and before the court is a ministerial act. State ex rel. Curry v. Gray, 726 S.W.2d 125, 128 (Tex. Crim. App.1987) (orig.proceeding) (op. on reh'g). A relator must establish the trial court (1) had a legal duty to rule on the motion; (2) was asked to rule on the motion; and (3) failed to do so. In re Keeter, 134 S.W.3d 250, 252 (Tex. App. -- Waco 2003, orig. proceeding). A relator must show that the trial court received, was aware of, and asked to rule on the motion. In re Villarreal, 96 S.W.3d 708, 710 (Tex. App. -- Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding). Filing something with the district clerk's office does not mean the trial court is aware of it; nor is the clerk's knowledge imputed to the trial court. Id. at n. 2. Relator has not provided file-stamped copies of his motion demonstrating it is actually pending in the trial court. Absent a showing the trial court is aware of and has been asked to rule on his motion, relator has not established his entitlement to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny relator s petition for writ of mandamus. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and Jamison. Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 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.
