In Re Bennie Ray Johnson Appeal from 221st District Court of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont __________________ NO. 09-19-00249-CR __________________ IN RE BENNIE RAY JOHNSON __________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding 221st District Court of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 19-07-09863-CR __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In an original petition for a writ of mandamus, Bennie Ray Johnson complains that he has been held in jail on a charge of burglary of a habitation following a probable cause hearing based upon the arresting officer’s police report and not upon a complaint signed by the victim of the burglary. Johnson failed to provide any supporting documentation with his mandamus petition. Additionally, “[i]t is well settled that an information may be predicated upon a complaint or affidavit made 1 upon information and belief.” Catchings v. State, 285 S.W.2d 233, 344 (Tex. Crim. App. 1955). Release from confinement in a criminal case is obtained through habeas corpus, over which this Court lacks original jurisdiction. See Tex. Code. Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 11.01, 11.05 (West 2015). Furthermore, to the extent his petition seeks relief against the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office and the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, or the officials holding those offices, we lack mandamus jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2018). To the extent that he seeks mandamus relief against the Judge of the 221st District Court of Montgomery County, Johnson has failed to show that he is entitled to the relief sought. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(1) (relator must file with petition “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding[]”). Accordingly, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). PETITION DENIED. PER CURIAM Submitted on August 20, 2019 Opinion Delivered August 21, 2019 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ. 2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.
