Lewis, John Edward
WR-83,367-01
| Tex. App. | Jun 24, 2015Background
- Relator John Edward Lewis was arrested in January 2015 but has not been charged by complaint, information, or indictment.
- In February 2015 Lewis requested discovery from the Travis County DA under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 39.14.
- The DA’s office informed Lewis its policy is to provide Article 39.14 discovery only after an indictment is filed.
- Lewis sought mandamus and prohibition to compel pre-indictment discovery and to prohibit withholding discovery until indictment.
- The Court considered whether Article 39.14’s “as soon as practicable” duty to produce discovery creates a ministerial, non-discretionary obligation before formal charges are filed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Article 39.14 requires pre-indictment discovery | Lewis: Article 39.14’s “as soon as practicable” creates a ministerial duty to produce discovery upon timely request, regardless of indictment status | DA: Article 39.14 applies to a “defendant” in a pending “case” or “action,” implying formal charges are required before its discovery duties attach | Court: Statutory language and references to court involvement indicate Article 39.14 applies after formal charges; no clear right to pre-indictment discovery |
| Whether relator showed entitlement to mandamus/prohibition | Lewis: He has no adequate legal remedy and demonstrates a clear right to relief under Article 39.14 | DA: Relief is improper because statute does not clearly require production pre-charge; discretionary matters remain | Court: Relator failed to show a clear, ministerial right; leave to file mandamus/prohibition denied |
Key Cases Cited
- In re State ex rel. Weeks, 391 S.W.3d 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (standards for mandamus: no adequate remedy and ministerial act)
- In re Bonilla, 424 S.W.3d 528 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (definition of clear right to relief for ministerial duty)
- In re McCann, 422 S.W.3d 701 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (prohibition requires clear right and lack of adequate remedy)
- State ex rel. Lykos v. Fine, 330 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (prohibition standard and prerequisites)
- Texas Dept. of Corrections v. Dalehite, 623 S.W.2d 420 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981) (ministerial act defined where law leaves no discretion)