CourtListener 10773075•In Re Francisco Ponciano-Ortiz v. the State of Texas
In Re Francisco Ponciano-Ortiz v. the State of Texas
CourtListener 10773075Txctapp2Jan 7, 2026
Full text
In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-25-00701-CV
___________________________
IN RE FRANCISCO PONCIANO-ORTIZ, Relator
Original Proceeding
442nd District Court of Denton County, Texas
Trial Court No. 24-10868-442
Before Womack, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Birdwell, J.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The court has considered relator’s “Petition for Writ of Mandamus,”
“Response of Real Party in Interest to Petition for Writ of Mandamus,” and
“Relator’s Reply to Response to Petition For Writ of Mandamus” and is of the
opinion that relief should be denied. See In re Baker, No. 02-23-00133-CV, 2023 WL
3879669, at *5–7 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth June 8, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)
(determining that although trial court abused its discretion by striking counteraffidavit,
facts were distinguishable from those in In re Allstate Indemnity Co., 622 S.W.3d 870
(Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding), with regard to adequacy of appellate remedy).
Accordingly, relator’s “Petition for Writ of Mandamus” is denied.
Per Curiam
Delivered: January 7, 2026
2
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.