In Re: Jim H. Hamilton, Jr.--Appeal from 3rd District Court of Anderson County

Annotate this Case

NO. 12-07-00395-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: JIM H. HAMILTON, JR., ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR

 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Jim H. Hamilton, Jr., acting pro se, has filed an application for an emergency writ of mandamus or a writ of injunction against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). Hamilton complains that TDCJ has not provided the appropriate legal items, supplies, materials, and postage he needs in order to file his original brief and the required number of copies in his appeal pending in this court. He asks this court to order TDCJ, through various employees at the Coffield Unit and all other persons acting in concert and participation with them, to furnish the necessary items without unjustified harassment and retaliation.

This court s power to issue writs is defined Section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. Section 22.221 grants courts of appeals the authority to issue (1) writs of mandamus and other writs necessary to enforce their jurisdiction; (2) writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or county court in the court of appeals district; and (3) writs of habeas corpus under specifically defined circumstances involving contempt orders in civil cases. Tex. Gov t Code Ann. 22.221 (Vernon 2004). We are not authorized to issue writs of mandamus against TDCJ or its officials, and Hamilton has not claimed or shown that the relief requested is necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of our court.1 Accordingly, this proceeding is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

BRIAN HOYLE

Justice

Opinion delivered November 30, 2007.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J. and Griffith, J.

(PUBLISH)

 

1 Appellant filed his brief in appellate cause number 12-07-00231-CV on October 2, 2007. The appeal has not been delayed by his failure to file the required number of copies.

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.