|
|
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 2-09-325-CV
IN RE MICHAEL RICHARD MORRISSEY RELATOR
------------
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
------------
MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]
------------
The court has considered Relator=s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that relief should be denied.[2] Accordingly, Relator=s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: GARDNER, DAUPHINOT, and WALKER, JJ.
DELIVERED: November 25, 2009
[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
[2]This court has been informed by the district clerk=s office and by the trial court clerks for Criminal District Court No. 1 and Criminal District Court No. 3 that they have not received the application for writ of habeas corpus that Relator contends he filed on May 31, 2009. Presentment of the motion to the trial court is a prerequisite to mandamus relief. See O=Connor v. First Court of Appeals, 837 S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding) (AMandamus will issue when there is a legal duty to perform a non‑discretionary act, a demand for performance, and a refusal.@); In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App.CAmarillo 2001, orig. proceeding) (AIndeed, one can hardly be faulted for doing nothing if he were never aware of the need to act.@). Because Relator=s motion has never been received by the district clerk=s office for filing, the Respondent has not been provided an opportunity to rule upon the motion.