Relator, Skyler Thomas Rice, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus

asking this Court to direct respondent, the Honorable Ramona Franklin, to rule on

a writ of habeas corpus and to appoint counsel to represent relator in a motion to

2

revoke community supervision.

1 We deny the petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4,

52.3(k).

Relator’s petition does not comply with the requirements enumerated in

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3 because it lacks an adequate appendix.2

See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1) (requiring original proceedings to be filed with

appendix that contains “a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or

any other document showing the matter complained of”). In the absence of an

adequate appendix or record, this Court cannot evaluate the merits of relator’s

petition. See In re McCreary, No. 12-15-00067-CR, 2015 WL 1395783, at *1

(Tex. App.—Tyler Mar. 25, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for

publication) (“Without an appendix and a record, we are unable to determine that

[r]elator is entitled to mandamus relief”).

Relator’s petition also is deficient because there is no showing that

respondent refused to rule on his application for writ of habeas corpus or on his

request for appointed counsel. See O’Connor v. First Court of Appeals, 837

S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tex. 1992) (to obtain mandamus relief, relator must show

1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Skyler Thomas Rice, Cause Number

1580280, pending in the 338th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the

Honorable Ramona Franklin presiding.

2 Relator’s appendix comprises two documents: A purported copy of the writ of

habeas corpus pending before the trial court and an Affidavit of Restraint. The

purported copy of the writ of habeas corpus is not file-stamped.

3

respondent had legal duty to perform non-discretionary act, relator made demand

for performance, and respondent refused); In re Dong Sheng Huang, 491 S.W.3d

383, 385–86 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016, orig. proceeding) (“Filing a

request for a ruling is insufficient to call the matter to the judge's attention because

a judge may be unaware of the request. Instead, the party demanding a ruling must

set its request either for submission or a hearing.”).

Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.