In re Robert Martinez Appeal from County Court at Law No. 5 of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00664-CR IN RE Robert MARTINEZ Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 1, 2014 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On September 22, 2014, relator filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in which he seeks mandamus relief against both the judge of County Court at Law No. 5 and the Bexar County clerk s office. The court has considered relator s petition and is of the opinion that relator is not entitled to mandamus relief with respect to the trial court judge. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus as to the respondent judge is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). With respect to relator s request for relief against the clerk s office, this court does not have jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. By statute, this court has the authority to issue a writ of mandamus against a judge of a district or county court in the court of appeals district and other writs as necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See TEX. GOV T CODE ANN. § 22.221(a)- 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 307125, styled The State of Texas v. Robert Martinez, pending in the County Court at Law No. 5, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Jason Pulliam presiding. 04-14-00664-CR (b) (West 2004). We conclude the writ is not necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction in this instance. Accordingly, relator s petition for writ of mandamus as to the Bexar County clerk s office is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Additionally, relator requested leave to file his petition for writ of mandamus. No leave is required to file a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Therefore, relator s request for leave to file is denied as moot. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.