Opinion issued January 13, 2005
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NO. 01-04-01134-CR
____________
IN RE ROBERT ANTHONY BROWN, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Robert Anthony Brown, filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of respondent, Judge Marc C. Carter. Relator asserts that respondent has failed to: (1) rule on his pro se motion for speedy trial, (2) set a bond amount, (3) conduct a pretrial motions hearing, and (4) allow relator to represent himself with the assistance of counsel in cause numbers 990261 and 990262. We deny the petition.
“Mandamus will not issue where there is a clear and adequate remedy at law, such as a normal appeal.” Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). The question of whether a defendant’s right to a speedy trial was violated is directly appealable after conviction. See Zamorano v. State, 84 S.W.3d 643 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (reversing conviction on speedy trial grounds). In Smith v. Gohmert, 962 S.W.2d 590, 592-93 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied mandamus relief, holding that the relator had an adequate remedy at law on his speedy trial claims.
Regarding relator’s other claims, relator must provide this Court with a sufficient record to establish his right to mandamus relief. Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837. Relator has not provided us with a record that shows he filed any motions or otherwise requested relief from respondent. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j).
Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Higley and Bland.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).