COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
|
IN RE: JAIME LUEVANO, Relator. |
§
§
§
§
§
§ |
No. 08-07-00303-CR
AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS |
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Relator, Jaime Luevano, requests this Court issue a writ of mandamus, ordering Honorable James T. Carter to rule on, or set for hearing, his motion for an examining trial. In order to obtain relief through a writ of mandamus, a relator must establish: (1) no other adequate remedy at law is available; and (2) the act he seeks to compel is ministerial. Dickens v. Court of Appeals For Second Supreme Judicial Dist. of Texas, 727 S.W.2d 542, 548 (Tex.Crim.App. 1987). An act is ministerial if it does not involve the exercise of discretion. State ex rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District, 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001). However, a so-called discretionary function may become ministerial when the facts and circumstances dictate but one rational decision. Buntion v. Harmon, 827 S.W.2d 945, 947 n.2 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992).
Based upon the limited record provided to us, Luevano has not established that he does not have an adequate remedy at law, or that the acts he seeks to compel are ministerial. See Tex.R.App.P. 52.7. In addition, he has not provided the Court with documentation of the matters complained of in his petition. See Tex.R.App.P. 52.3(j). Therefore, Luevano has failed to demonstrate he is entitled to the relief he has requested. See Dickens, 727 S.W.2d at 548. Accordingly, we deny mandamus relief. See Tex.R.App.P. 52.8(a).
October 25, 2007
DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Chief Justice
Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Carr, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)