In Re Charles Matula Appeal from 9th 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. 09-20-00256-CR __________________ IN RE CHARLES MATULA __________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding 9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Through a petition for a writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary relief, Charles Matula seeks to stay execution on a search warrant issued by the judge of the 9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas, on October 2, 2020, and to compel the trial judge to (1) withdraw his order of November 6, 2020, which denied Matula’s motion to quash a search warrant for all stored files in a certain Yahoo account, and (2) quash the search warrant. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show that he has no adequate remedy at law available and that he seeks to compel a ministerial act. State ex rel. 1 Healey v. McMeans, 884 S.W.2d 772, 774 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (orig. proceeding). An act is ministerial when the law clearly spells out the duty to be performed with such certainty that nothing is left to the exercise of discretion or judgment. Id. A person must establish that he has standing to complain of a search warrant or its execution. McInnis v. State, 657 S.W.2d 113, 114 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983). Relator has not shown that he has a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought. State ex rel. Rosenthal v. Poe, 98 S.W.3d 194, 199 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). PETITION DENIED. PER CURIAM Submitted on November 24, 2020 Opinion Delivered November 25, 2020 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ. 2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.