Court of Appeals of Texas, Seventh District, Amarillo
Original Proceeding Arising From Proceedings Before the 47th
District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court No. 24,
143-A; Honorable Dan L. Schaap, Presiding
PIRTLE, PARKER, and DOSS, JJ.
PATRICK A. PIRTLE JUSTICE.
Steven Boyd, an inmate proceeding pro se and in
forma pauperis, seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the
Honorable Dan L. Schaap, presiding judge of the 47th District
Court, to declare a 2014 judgment of conviction void. For the
reasons expressed herein, we deny the requested relief.
original proceeding is just another attempt by Relator to
re-litigate his 2014 robbery conviction in trial court cause
number 24, 143-A, a charge to which he entered a plea of
guilty and waived his right of appeal. The arguments he
presents by this original proceeding mirror arguments
previously addressed by this court.
Standard of Review
is an extraordinary remedy granted only when a relator can
show that (1) the trial court abused its discretion and (2)
that no adequate appellate remedy exists. In re H.E.B.
Grocery Co., L.P., 492 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex.
2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). When seeking mandamus
relief, a relator bears the burden of proving these two
requirements. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840
(Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
establish an abuse of discretion, the relator must
demonstrate the trial court acted unreasonably, arbitrarily,
or without reference to any guiding rules or principles.
See Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc.,
701 S.W.2d 238, 241-42 (Tex. 1985). To establish no adequate
remedy by appeal, the relator must show there is no adequate
remedy at law to address the alleged harm and that the act
requested is a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary
or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth
Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210
(Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). Furthermore, in
order to establish a ministerial act, a relator must also
show (1) a legal duty to perform; (2) a demand for
performance; and (3) a refusal to act. Stoner v.
Massey, 586 S.W.2d 843, 846 (Tex. 1979).
again, Relator asks this court to compel Judge Schaap to
declare the 2014 judgment of conviction void. He also
complains of his trial counsel's advice to plead guilty
after the trial court denied a motion to suppress. As this
court previously noted, Relator had an adequate remedy at law
to complain of a suppression ruling but waived that right in
a plea bargain exchange. See In re Boyd, No.
07-15-00209-CV, 2015 Tex.App. LEXIS 7156, at *2-3 (Tex.
App.-Amarillo July 10, 2015, orig. proceeding).
carries a heavy burden in attempting to have his conviction
declared void. His numerous attempts to do so have all
failed. As to Relator's claim of ineffective assistance
of counsel, we note that even a substantiated claim of
ineffective assistance of counsel alone will not render a
conviction void. See Pena v. State, 551 S.W.3d 367,
370 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 2018, no pet.).
Relator seeks to have this court order Judge Schaap to rule
in a particular way-something we do not have the authority to
do. Consequently, this court will not compel Judge Schaap to
declare Relator's 2014 robbery conviction void based on
an alleged claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
petition for writ ...