Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-24-00555-CR
IN RE Aaron POUCH, Relator
Original Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios, Justice Lori Massey Brissette, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 16, 2024
DENIED
Relator Aaron Pouch has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that the trial court failed to give him the proper jail-time credit for time he has served and failed to rule on three motions for judgment nunc pro tunc, which he filed in the trial court. Pouch seeks an order directing the trial court to grant him an additional 640 days of jail-time credit. We deny the petition.
A trial court’s failure to award jail-time credit to a defendant may be corrected by a nunc pro tunc order. See Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); In re Daisy, 156 S.W.3d 922, 924 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, orig. proceeding). Further, if a defendant files a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc and the trial court denies the motion or fails to respond, “relief may be sought by filing an application for writ of mandamus in a court of appeals.” Ex parte Florence, 319 S.W.3d 695, 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010).
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. B19843, styled The State of Texas v. Aaron Pouch, in the 198th Judicial 1
District Court, Kerr County, Texas, the Honorable Rex Emerson presiding.
04-24-00555-CR
To be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must provide a record that is sufficient to establish (1) “that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm,” and (2) “that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary or judicial decision.” State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct. of App. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); see TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a); In re Pitts, No. 04-06-00269-CV, 2006 WL 1407452, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 17, 2006, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Moreover, in the context of a mandamus petition seeking additional jail-time credit, the defendant must show that the trial court failed to award the defendant with jail-time credit in accordance with a mandatory statutory duty and that the failure to award additional jail-time credit was not the result of judicial reasoning. See Collins v. State, 240 S.W.3d 925, 928 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); In re Brown, 343 S.W.3d 803, 805 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011).
Here, Pouch failed to provide any mandamus record, including a copy of the nunc pro tunc motion purportedly filed in the trial court. Consequently, Pouch failed to establish what jail-time credit, if any, he has been awarded, failed to provide any evidence showing any jail-time credit to which he may be entitled, and failed to show that any failure of the trial court to award him with jail-time credit was not the result of judicial reasoning. As a result, Pouch “has failed to provide a sufficient record for us to determine that he is indisputably entitled to the jail-time credit he seeks.” In re Zepeda, No. 03-12-00214-CV, 2012 WL 1499603, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin April 25, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication); see In re Pitts, No. 04-06-00269-CV, 2006 WL 1407452, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 17, 2006, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
Accordingly, we deny Pouch’s petition for writ of mandamus.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-