In Re Jasmine Simon v. the State of Texas

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed
November 15, 2023.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-23-00855-CV

IN RE JASMINE SIMON, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
246th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2022-08581

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On Monday, November 13, 2023, relator Jasmine Simon filed a petition and
amended petition for writ of mandamus and motion and amended motion for
emergency stay of proceedings in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221;
see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the
visiting judge presiding in the 246th District Court of Harris County, the
Honorable Judy Warne, to vacate her denial of a motion to transfer and her denial
to abate or dismiss the underlying matter.

To be entitled to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus, the relator
must show that the trial court abused its discretion and that there is no adequate
remedy by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36
(Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).

Relator bears the burden of demonstrating her entitlement to mandamus
relief. See In re Ford Motor Co., 165 S.W.3d 315, 317 (Tex. 2005) (per curiam)
(orig. proceeding); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig.
proceeding). This burden includes providing this Court with a record sufficient to
make that showing. See Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 837 (stating that it is relator's
burden to provide a record sufficient to establish her entitlement to mandamus
relief); In re Le, 335 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011,
orig. proceeding) (stating that “[t]hose seeking the extraordinary remedy of
mandamus must follow the applicable procedural rules. Chief among these is the
critical obligation to provide the reviewing court with a complete and adequate
record.”) (footnote omitted).

Here, although relator filed an amended petition, both the amended petition
and appendix contain a multitude of deficiencies and/or are incomplete. See Tex.
R. App. P. 9.8, 9.9, 52.3(k)(1)(A)-(B), & 52.7(a)(1)-(2). Insofar as the record is
incomplete, relator has failed to establish an abuse of discretion.

2
Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s amended petition for writ of mandamus.
Additionally, we deny relator’s amended motion for emergency stay of
proceedings.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hassan, Poissant, and Wilson.

3