In Re: Justin Jeremy Miller v. the State of Texas

NO. 12-24-00141-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: §

JUSTIN JEREMY MILLER, § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
Justin Jeremy Miller, acting pro se, filed this original proceeding to challenge
Respondent’s failure to hold a habeas corpus hearing and issue a writ of habeas corpus. 1 On
May 13, 2024, the Clerk of this Court informed Relator that his petition fails to comply with
appellate Rules 52.3(a)-(e), (g), and (j)-(k) and 52.7. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3 (contents of
petition); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (record). The notice warned that the petition would be referred to
this Court for dismissal unless Relator provided an amended petition before May 24. This
deadline expired without Relator filing an amended petition, the record, or other response to this
Court’s notice.
Generally, a party seeking mandamus relief must bring forward all that is necessary to
establish his claim for mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Texas Rule of Appellate
Procedure 52.7 requires the relator to file a record as part of his petition in an original
proceeding. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7. Specifically, a relator must file (1) a certified or sworn copy

1
Respondent is the Honorable Kerry L. Russell, Judge of the 7th District Court in Smith County, Texas.
The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest.
of every document that is material to his claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying
proceeding; and (2) “a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any
underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or a statement that no
testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained.” TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). It is
a relator’s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish the right to
extraordinary relief. See In re Daisy, No. 12-13-00266-CR, 2014 WL 5577068, at *2 (Tex.
App.–Tyler Aug. 29, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
In this case, Relator did not provide a record in accordance with Rule 52.7. Absent a
record, we cannot determine whether Relator is entitled to mandamus relief. 2 See In re
McCreary, No. 12-15-00067-CR, 2015 WL 1395783 (Tex. App.–Tyler Mar. 25, 2015, orig.
proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Accordingly, we deny
Relator’s mandamus petition.

Opinion delivered May 31, 2024.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

2
Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable
rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by
counsel. In re Guerrero, No. 12-21-00100-CR, 2021 WL 3412558, at *1 n.3 (Tex. App.—Tyler Aug. 4, 2021, no
pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

2
COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT

MAY 31, 2024

NO. 12-24-00141-CR

JUSTIN JEREMY MILLER,
Relator
V.

HON. JUDGE KERRY L. RUSSELL,
Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by
Justin Jeremy Miller; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-24-00141-CR and the
defendant in trial court cause number 007-0422-24, pending on the docket of the 7th Judicial
District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed
herein on May 13, 2024, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of
this Court that the writ should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and
ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denied.
By per curiam opinion.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.