Full text
in Re Charles Matula
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-21-00002-CR __________________
IN RE CHARLES MATULA
__________________________________________________________________
Original Proceeding 9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. SW-2020, #599 __________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Through a petition for a writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary relief, Charles Matula seeks to stay execution on a search warrant issued on October 2, 2020, by the judge of the 9th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas, in his capacity as a magistrate and to compel the judge to quash the search warrant. 1 See
1 We denied mandamus relief in a proceeding filed by Matula after the trial court signed an order denying a motion to quash on November 6, 2020. See In re Matula, No. 09-20-00256-CR, 2020 WL 6929643, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Nov. 25, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Matula alleged he is the owner of the Yahoo account that is the subject of the search warrant in an amended motion to quash the search warrant. This mandamus proceeding
State ex rel. Holmes v. Salinas, 774 S.W.2d 421, 422-23 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1989, orig. proceeding).
To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show that he has no adequate remedy at law available and that he seeks to compel a ministerial act. State ex rel. Healey v. McMeans, 884 S.W.2d 772, 774 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (orig. proceeding). An act is ministerial when the law clearly spells out the duty to be performed with such certainty that nothing is left to the exercise of discretion or judgment. Id. Relator has not shown that he has a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on February 9, 2021 Opinion Delivered February 10, 2021 Do Not Publish
Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
followed the trial court’s denial of the amended motion to quash on December 16, 2020.