Julia Wisenberg, Volume 50 Articles Editor
JUDGE YEARY DELIVERED THE OPINION OF A UNANIMOUS COURT.
The issue in this case was whether the Court of Criminal Appeals and court of appeals had concurrent jurisdiction for a petition for writ of mandamus against a county court judge, and if so, whether the relator satisfied the criteria for mandamus relief. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that the original mandamus application was properly filed with the Court and granted the relator’s requested relief.
In Powell v. Hocker, a woman was charged with misdemeanor DWI. Her attorney sought permission from the court to provide copies of the discovery documents in her case. Under Article 39.14 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure (the “Michael Morton Act”), a defense attorney may allow his client to view the discovery information but cannot provide copies of such documents to the client. The defendant requested a “release” from this prohibition, which the trial court granted. The Lubbock County District Attorney challenged the county court judge’s decision through an application for writ of mandamus.
The plain language Article 5, Section 6(a) of the Texas Constitution and Section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code do not extend mandamus jurisdiction of the courts of appeals to a petition for writ of mandamus against a county court at law judge. Thus, the District Attorney, as relator, properly filed his application with the Court.
Further, the Court will grant mandamus relief if two predicates are satisfied. First, the relator must show that he cannot obtain the relief he seeks through an adequate remedy at law. Second, he must articulate a clear right to the requested relief. Here, the Court held that the relator satisfied both of these requirements for mandamus relief. The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure’s clear statutory language unequivocally prohibits a defense attorney sharing copies of discovery information with the defendant. The statute is unqualified by evidence of legislative intent. Therefore, the trial court effectively abrogated the legislative judgment and improperly granted the defendant’s motion to obtain copies of discovery in her case.
Thus, the court conditionally granted mandamus relief to the Lubbock County District Attorney, directing the county court at law to comply with the Court’s opinion by rescinding its order.
Powell v. Hocker, No. WR-85,177-01, 2017 WL 1244452 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 5, 2017, orig. proceeding).