Opinion issued April 13, 2006
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NO. 01-06-00293-CR
____________
IN RE RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that his request for entry of a nunc pro tunc order and a bench warrant for his return to Harris County have been ignored. We deny the petition.
We review pro se applications with less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding). However, relator’s petition does not identify the respondent judge or the court, does not specify the relief sought, and does not include a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of or any other document showing the matter complained of. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(d), (j)(1)(A). Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to relief. Barnes, 832 S.W.2d at 426.
Moreover, relator’s petition filed in this Court does not meet the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure because it does not certify that a copy was served on a respondent. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.5.
The petition for writ of mandamus is therefore denied.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Jennings and Alcala.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).