in Re: Samuel Rios
Opinion
NO. 12-21-00190-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS
IN RE: §
SAMUEL RIOS, § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING RELATOR §
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
Samuel Rios, acting pro se, filed this original proceeding, in which he seeks a writ instructing Respondent to prepare copies of the trial records, the Anderson County District Attorney’s work product file, evidence that was intended to be use at trial and not intended to be used at trial, and contact information for the court reporter on his case. 1 On October 20, 2021, the Clerk of this Court informed Relator that his petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52.3(a)-(h) and (k) and 52.7. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3 (form and contents of petition); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (record). The notice warned that the petition would be referred to this Court for dismissal unless Relator provided the appendix and record on or before November 1. This deadline expired without a response from Relator.
Generally, a party seeking mandamus relief must bring forward all that is necessary to establish his claim for mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52. The petition must contain certain items, including the identity of parties and counsel, a table of contents, an index of authorities, a statement of the case, a statement of jurisdiction, issues presented, a statement of facts, argument, and an appendix. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(a)-(h), (k). Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.7 requires the relator to file a record as part of his petition in an original proceeding. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7. Specifically, a relator must file (1) a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to his claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding; and (2) “a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). It is a relator’s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish the right to extraordinary relief. See In re Daisy, No. 12-13-00266-CR, 2014 WL 5577068, at *2 (Tex. App.–Tyler Aug. 29, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). In this case, Relator did not provide a record in accordance with Rule 52.7. Absent a record, we cannot determine whether Relator is entitled to relief. See In re McCreary, No. 12-15-00067-CR, 2015 WL 1395783 (Tex. App.–Tyler Mar. 25, 2015, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Because Relator’s petition fails to comply with the appellate rules, he presents nothing for this Court to review. 2 Therefore, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus. All pending motions are overruled as moot.
Opinion delivered November 17, 2021.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
(DO NOT PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT
NOVEMBER 17, 2021
NO. 12-21-00190-CR
SAMUEL RIOS,
Relator
V.
HON. MARK A. CALHOON,
Respondent
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Samuel Rios; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-21-00190-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 24895, formerly pending on the docket of the 3rd Judicial District Court of Anderson County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on October 18, 2021, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the writ should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denied.
By per curiam opinion.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.