TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-20-00616-CV

In re Lamar Lovett

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Lamar Lovett has filed a petition for writ of mandamus asserting that the trial court has not ruled on his motion for postconviction DNA retesting and his motion for the appointment of counsel. Although mandamus may issue to compel a trial court to rule on a motion, the relator is required to provide a mandamus record establishing that he requested a ruling on the pending motion. See In re Sarkissian, 243 S.W.3d 860, 861 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, orig. proceeding) (observing that mandamus record failed to establish that relator requested ruling or called motion to trial court’s attention and that “mere filing of a motion with a trial court clerk does not equate to a request that the trial court rule on the motion”); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a) (requiring relator to file with petition, among other things, “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claims for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”). Because Lovett has failed to provide a sufficient mandamus record, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). __________________________________________ Thomas J. Baker, Justice Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Baker and Smith Filed: January 7, 2021