Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 05-25-2022
Case Style:
IN RE ERIC J. BROWN
Case Number: 04-20-00614-CR
Judge:
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Irene Rios, Justice
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
Court:
Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
On appeal from The County Court at Law No. 2 of Bexar County
Plaintiff's Attorney: Audrey Gossett Louis
Defendant's Attorney:
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Description:
San Antonio, Texas - Criminal Defense lawyer represented defendant with a writ of mandamus.
A trial court clearly abuses its discretion when it fails to rule within a reasonable time on a
properly-presented motion. See Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Garcia, 945 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.—
San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding). However, a relator has the burden of providing this court
with a record sufficient to establish his right to mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1)
(requiring relator to file “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the
relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”). In a case such as this
1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 15-02-0067-CRW, styled State of Texas v. Eric J. Brown, in the 81st Judicial
District Court, Wilson County, Texas, the Honorable Lynn Ellison presiding.
04-20-00614-CR
- 2 -
one, a relator has the burden to provide the court of appeals with a record showing the motion at
issue was properly filed, the trial court was made aware of the motion, and the motion has not been
ruled on by the trial court for an unreasonable period of time. See In re Mendoza, 131 S.W.3d
167, 167-68 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding).
Here, relator did not provide this court with a copy of the motion he claims the trial court
has failed to rule upon or any proof indicating the trial court is aware of the motion or has failed
to rule for an unreasonable period of time. Because relator did not provide this court with a
sufficient record, relator has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief.
Outcome: Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
We deny as moot relator’s request for leave to file his petition for writ of mandamusbecause leave is not required to file a mandamus petition in an intermediate appellate court.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: