Date: 06-05-2016

Case Style: In Re: Sergio Gallardo

Case Number: 08-16-00099-CR

Judge: Steven Hughes

Court: COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

Plaintiff's Attorney: Hon. Jaime E. Esparza

Defendant's Attorney: Francisco X. Dominguez

Description: Relator, Sergio Gallardo, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the Honorable
Francisco X. Dominguez, Judge of the 205th District Court of El Paso, Texas, and the El Paso
County District Clerk. Relator contends that the District Clerk and the trial court have failed to
provide him with a free record for use in “perfection of appeal.” We deny mandamus relief.
A court of appeals has jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against certain judges
within its geographic district. See TEX.GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(b)(1) (West 2004). A court
of appeals also has authority to issue a writ of mandamus if it is necessary to enforce its
jurisdiction. Id. § 22.221(a). Thus, we may issue a writ of mandamus to a district clerk only if
he or she interferes with the court’s jurisdiction. See id. at § 22.221(a); In re Washington, 7
S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding). Relator does not have
any pending appeals before this Court and he has failed to show that the District Clerk has
interfered with the Court’s appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, we do not have jurisdiction to
grant the relief requested with respect to the District Clerk. See In re Bernard, 993 S.W.2d 453,
454 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding).
Relator filed this original proceeding to obtain a copy of the appellate record for the
stated purpose of pursuing an appeal, but our records reflect that Relator’s direct appeal from his
convictions concluded in 2005. On February 3, 2005, we issued an opinion and judgment
affirming Relator’s convictions of aggravated sexual assault of a child and indecency with a
child. See Gallardo v. State, No. 08-03-00287-CR, 2005 WL 280308 (Tex.App.--El Paso
February 3, 2005, pet. ref’d). The Court of Criminal Appeals denied Relator’s petition for
discretionary review, and our mandate issued on September 16, 2005. Thus, Relator’s
convictions became final in 2005. A criminal defendant is not entitled to a free copy of the
record once he has exhausted his state appeals, absent some compelling, recognized reason. In
re Strickhausen, 994 S.W.2d 936, 937 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding); In
re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 693 (Tex.App.--San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding).

Outcome: Relator has not met the required showing. Accordingly, we deny mandamus relief.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: