IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-22-00114-CR
IN RE ROBERT DANIEL RODRIGUEZ
Original Proceeding
______________
From the 12th District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court No. 27018
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this original proceeding filed on April 19, 2022, relator, Robert Daniel Rodriguez
seeks to compel the respondent, the Judge of the 12th Judicial District Court of Walker
County, to rule on relator’s “Defendents Motion Requesting State to Modify Judgement
of Sentence in a New Punishment Hearing."
While, according to relator, the motion has been pending more than 120 days,
relator makes no sworn statement in the motion and provides no documents that would
indicate that he has done anything in an effort to draw the pending motion to the
respondent’s attention during that time. The trial court's duty to rule on a party's motion
generally does not arise until the movant has brought the motion to the court's attention.
In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding). Mandamus
will not lie unless the movant establishes that he has done so and that the trial court then
fails or refuses to rule within a reasonable time. Id. The mere filing of a matter with the
clerk is not enough. See In re Flores, No. 04-03-00449-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 5263 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio Jun. 25, 2003, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see also In re Keeter, No.
10-19-00277-CR, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 7851, at *2 (Tex. App.—Waco Aug. 28, 2019, orig.
proceeding) (not designated for publication).
Accordingly, relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to
rule on relator’s “Defendents Motion Requesting State to Modify Judgement of Sentence
in a New Punishment Hearing" is denied.
TOM GRAY
Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Johnson, and
Justice Smith
Petition denied
Opinion delivered and filed April 27, 2022
Do not publish
[OT06]
In re Rodriguez Page 2