in Re James H. Gentry

DENIED and Opinion Filed May 18, 2020

S In The

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-20-00442-CV

IN RE JAMES H. GENTRY, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 199th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 199-81623-07, 199-81624-07, 199-81625-07, 199-81626-07, 199-81627-07

MEMORANDUM OPINION NUNC PRO TUNC1

Before Justices Whitehill, Pedersen III, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Whitehill

James H. Gentry has filed a petition for writ of mandamus requesting the Court to compel the trial court to rule on his motion for order nunc pro tunc to correct the trial court’s judgment. We deny relief.

A petition seeking mandamus relief must contain a certification stating that the relator “has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). The Court requires relator’s certification to state substantially what is written in rule 52.3(j). See In re Butler, 270 S.W.3d 757, 758 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding). Relator’s petition contains a certification that his petition is “TRUE and CORRECT, to the best of my knowledge under the threat of perjury. . . .” Thus, relator’s petition does not comply with the certification requirement of rule 52.3(j). See id.

Furthermore, as the party seeking relief, the relator has the burden of providing the Court with a sufficient record to establish his right to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Relator’s record must meet the requirements of appellate rule of procedure 52.3. Rule 52.3(k)(1)(A) requires the relator to file an appendix with his petition that contains “a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any other document showing the matter complained of.”2 TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A). Additionally, rule 52.7(a)(1) requires the relator to file with the petition “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief that was filed in any underlying proceeding.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1).

Relator has attached copies of documents to his petition, but the documents are not certified or sworn copies and thus are not properly authenticated under the rules of appellate procedure. Without a properly authenticated appendix containing certified or sworn copies of documents, relator has not met his burden. See Butler, 270 S.W.3d at 759.

Having concluded that relator’s petition does not meet the requirements in the rules of appellate procedure for consideration of mandamus relief, we deny relator’s petition. See Butler, 270 S.W.3d at 758–59.

/Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE

200442F.P05