Case Information
*1 ' 1S'Q ·ll4? -t~ CAUSENO. 6477; CAUSE NO. 7043; CAUSE NO. 7045 IN THE 32N° JUDICIAL JOE C. VELASQUEZ § TDCJ-ID # 1514824 DISTRICT COURT OF §
/{'>. SID# TX06382761 § MITCHELL<~OBNTY, TX
"· RELATOR §
V. §
MITCHELL COUNTY §
COURT REPORTER § RECEIVED IN /tOURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS MARY MARGARET SPARKS-COX
JUL 012015 OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER Abel Acosta, Cieri<
TEXAS CSR 1946 · .A
PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL APR.E CATION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS ~~~" ~,)
TO THE HONO~BLE i~E~~F SAID COURT:
l A;},, "\.. '<~~~ y
COME~~~O~,'J~~t;~)ELASQUEZ, RELATOR, PROSE IN THE ABOVE-STYLED AND NUMBERED' CAUSE OF ACTIONS AND FILES THIS ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR ~~< W '{ :r OF MANDAMUS.
\ < /
I JOE C. VELASQUEZ; TDCJ # 1514824, IS AN OFFENDER INCARCERATED IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND IS APPEARING PROSE. WHO CAN BE LOCATED AT THE THOMAS GOREE UNIT, 7405 HWY. 75 SOUTH, *2 ..
HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 17344. RELATOR HAS EXHAUSTED HIS REMEDIES AND HAS NO OTHER ADEQUATE REMEDY AT LAW. THE ACT SOUGHT TO BE COMPELLED IS MINISTERIAL, NOT DISCRETIONARY IN NATURE. RESPONDENT IS REQUIRED TO MAKE AVAILABLE A TRANSCRIPT COPY OF A TRIAL COURTS PROCEEDINGS FOR APPEALS AND BE TRANSCRIPTED TO AN APPELLATE COURT FOR REVIEW IF THERE ARE ISSUES TO RESOLVED ,3~/:>,~-~- "'·,'\w,
II RESPONDENT: MARY MARGARET SPARKS-COX, IN HER c 1 AQifY AS;COURT "'>, / ''-... .... ~\ ............ ; REPORTER OF MITCHELL COUNTY, TEXAS HAS A M~ISTE \ ~k9DTY TO MAKE COPIES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST OF THE TRIAL~T~S'®\Jif ~ '~~~ / ~\ ....
f ~ ~ V\ .. III • '•·,'¢~>, . , ' '- '\ £:-:--.
THE RESPONDENT HAS FAILED TO P~OVIn'~;icoMPLETE COPY UPON
. -'" ~· ·-' .· ...... ' 1:
NUMEROUS REQUESTS OF THETRIACCOURTS TRANSCRIPT, FOR THE PURPOSE ,.," \ ' ., . OF FILING AN APPLICATION FORWRI't-OF HABEAS CORPUS. RELATOR HAS ·"~~·.··>~' ,f ~'. ·'
REPEATEDLY PUT RESP0NDENT ON-NOTICE THAT RELATOR SEEKS THE ',\~~>·~ \fi
TRANSMITTAL OF T:HE CO'Ni·PLBITE COPY OF THE TRIAL COURTS TRANSCRIPT. '\::.~~ ~~~?~c~~<r
RELATOR HAS GONE . . •Th'L BEYOND ANY REQUIREMENT OR OBLIGATION . -f~" !/
IMPOSED UP@N HiN1 BY.THE RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. IN CONTRAST ., -~ ~./' t~\ "'*" ~~~ '>'J:t,. TO RELA!fOR'S;,EFFORTS, RESPONDENT HAS WHOLLY FAILED TO COMPLY WITH TH~ RGtE~35F··~~LLATE PROCEDURE, AND IS ACTING IN BAD FAITH, AND ,h ·,)''A / . FAI:l0ED TO AFFORD RELATOR THE PROFESSIONAL AND COMMON COURTESY OF "*'? "'l,~. ~<-:.~ jifo ANY WRIJYTEN RESPONSE AS TO THE FAILED AND INCOMPLETE REQUESTS. JVr
*3 IV
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED RELATOR JOE C. VELASQUEZ, PRO SE, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A FINDING THAT THE RESPONDENT DID NOT TRANSMIT THE COMPLETE COURT TRIAL TRANSCRIPT WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME AFTER THE DATE THEY WERE REQUESTED AND THE RELATOR BROUGHT THIS LITIGATION IN GOOD FAITH AND HAS SUBSTANTIALLY PREVAILED .. '\, "H.~
RELATOR PRAYS FOR AN ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO TRANSMIT THE ,..,.¥ ,.:;,__..,,..., '·,,,%-. COMPLETE TRANSCRIPT OF THE TRIAL COURTS PROCEEDINGS~ONWMARCH 13, '-i<:<, 2008