In Re Gerald J. Durden Appeal from 248th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 30, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-18-00716-CR IN RE GERALD J. DURDEN, Relator ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 248th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 905464 MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 16, 2018, relator Gerald J. Durden filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2017); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the District Clerk of Harris County, Texas, Chris Daniel, to present relator’s motion for postconviction DNA testing to the appropriate trial court. This court’s mandamus jurisdiction is governed by section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. Section 22.221 expressly limits the mandamus jurisdiction of the courts of appeals to: (1) writs against a district court judge or county court judge in the court of appeals’ district, (2) writs against a judge of a district court who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry under Chapter 52, Code of Criminal Procedure, in the court of appeals district; (3) writs against an associate judge of a district or county court appointed by a judge under Chapter 201, Family Code, in the court of appeals district for the judge who appointed the associate judge; and (4) all writs necessary to enforce the court of appeals’ jurisdiction. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2017). Because the petition for writ of mandamus is directed toward a district clerk and is not necessary to enforce this court’s jurisdiction, we have no jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is ordered dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Busby. Do Not Publish — Tex.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.