IN RE: CHARLES R. EDWARDS (2010)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Charles R. Edwards, has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, requesting that this Court compel respondent to set aside the amended supplemental complaint filed in cause number 1167894 and to vacate the judgment of conviction in trial court cause number 1167894.¹  Relator's petition does not meet the requirementsof the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.   For example, it does not include a table of contents, index of authorities, an appendix that contains a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of.   See Tex.R.App. P. 9.5, 52.3(b), (c), (k).

In addition, there are three prerequisites for the issuance of a writ of mandamus by an appellate court, namely:  (1) the lower court must have a legal duty to perform a nondiscretionary act;  (2) the relator must make a demand for performance;  and (3) the subject court must refuse that request.  Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding).   Relator has not provided us with a record that shows that he made any request of respondent to perform a nondiscretionary act that respondent refused.   This Court has previously stated, that although we generously read a pro se litigant's petition in an original proceeding, we will hold “the relator to the same procedural standards we apply to other litigants.”  Id at 426.   Relator has not provided us with a record that shows that he is entitled to mandamus relief.²

The petition for writ of mandamus is therefore denied.

Any pending motions are denied as moot.

It is so ORDERED.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. Relator names as respondent, the Honorable Jan Krocker, Judge, 184th District Court, Harris County, Texas..  FN1. Relator names as respondent, the Honorable Jan Krocker, Judge, 184th District Court, Harris County, Texas.

FN2. Relator has not provided this Court with any documents to support his claim that an amended supplemental complaint filed in trial court cause number 1167844 is defective.   Relator has not provided this court with copy of the indictment, judgment and sentence, or any other materials related to cause number 1167844.   Moreover, relator is requesting post-conviction relief and has not demonstrated that this Court has jurisdiction to review his petition for mandamus..  FN2. Relator has not provided this Court with any documents to support his claim that an amended supplemental complaint filed in trial court cause number 1167844 is defective.   Relator has not provided this court with copy of the indictment, judgment and sentence, or any other materials related to cause number 1167844.   Moreover, relator is requesting post-conviction relief and has not demonstrated that this Court has jurisdiction to review his petition for mandamus.

PER CURIAM