In Re Kevin Nichols v. the State of Texas

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
————————————

No. 08-26-00092-CR
————————————

In re Kevin Nichols

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS

M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N

On February 17, 2026, Relator, Kevin Nichols, filed a single-page handwritten document,

which does not provide a case style and is not signed, requesting that we “File Treason Charges

against” a named individual. 1 Nichols further seeks to “file obstruction of Justice” and states that

his requests are “all in mandamus.” We construe the document as a petition initiating an original

1
The filing also includes three attachments, consisting of copies of two requests under the Public Information Act he
purportedly submitted to the Andrews County Sheriff’s Office and a copy of sections 552.028 and 552.029 of the
Texas Government Code.
appellate proceeding seeking extraordinary relief. 2 See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1(stating that a petition

filed in an appellate court seeking extraordinary relief, such as a writ of mandamus or a writ of

quo warranto, commences an original appellate proceeding).

As an intermediate appellate court, we lack jurisdiction to initiate or to compel the initiation

of a criminal prosecution. See In re LaRue, No. 08-25-00215-CR, 2025 WL 2609571, at *1

(Tex. App.—El Paso Sept. 9, 2025, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (not designated for publication);

In re Vineyard, No. 07-03-0311-CV, 2003 WL 21688108, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo July 18,

2003, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (per curiam).

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

February 26, 2026

Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)

2
We note that Nichols’ petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P.
9.1(b), 9.4, 9.5, 52.3, 52.7.

2