in Re Venice Anthony Patterson

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-07-346 CV ____________________ IN RE VENICE ANTHONY PATTERSON Original Proceeding MEMORANDUM OPINION Venice Anthony Patterson seeks mandamus relief to compel the trial court to certify that Patterson's criminal case is not a plea-bargain case and that Patterson has a right to appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). On July 12, 2007, we notified the relator that his petition did not comply with appellate rules governing original proceedings. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3, 52.7. We notified the relator that his certificate of service did not establish service on the respondent and real party in interest. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.5(e), 52.2. We also notified the relator that he must either pay the filing fee or establish his inability to pay by filing a declaration of indigence that includes the information required by Rule 20.1(b). See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. We provided an extension of time for the relator to amend his petition. Patterson did not amend his petition or provide a record from which we can determine whether the trial court abused its discretion. The relator neither amended his declaration of inability to pay costs in this proceeding nor certified that he mailed a copy of the petition to the respondent and the real party in interest. The relator has not shown that he is entitled to mandamus relief from this Court. See In re Bill Heard Chevrolet, Ltd., 209 S.W.3d 311, 314 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding); In re Lewis, No. 07-04-432 CV, 2004 WL 2074306 (Tex. App.--Amarillo Sept. 17, 2004, orig. proceeding [mand. denied]); In re Hensler, 27 S.W.3d 719, 720 (Tex. App.--Waco 2000, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we deny relief on the petition for writ of mandamus. PETITION DENIED. PER CURIAM Opinion Delivered September 13, 2007 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.