Full Opinion

NUMBER 13-26-00398-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG IN RE MELODIO ELOY REYES ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Silva, Peña, and Fonseca Memorandum Opinion by Justice Peña1 By pro se petition for writ of mandamus, relator Melodio Eloy Reyes asserts, inter alia, that: (1) he was unlawfully searched, (2) he is illegally detained, and (3) the trial court failed to comply with its ministerial duty to rule on relator’s motion for dismissal of the underlying case based on the failure to provide a speedy trial. 2 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). 2 In addition to his petition for writ of mandamus, relator also filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We grant relator’s motion for leave to proceed without the payment of costs. In a criminal case, to be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must establish both that the act sought to be compelled is a ministerial act not involving a discretionary or judicial decision and that there is no adequate remedy at law to redress the alleged harm. See In re Meza, 611 S.W.3d 383, 388 (Tex. Crim. App. 2020) (orig. proceeding). If the relator fails to meet both requirements, then the petition for writ of mandamus should be denied. See State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct. of Apps. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). It is the relator’s burden to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief. See id.; In re Pena, 619 S.W.3d 837, 839 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2021, orig. proceeding); see also Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (“Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he seeks.”); see generally TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3, 52.7. The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus, the response filed by the State of Texas, acting by and through Toribio “Terry” Palacios, the District Attorney for Hidalgo County, Texas, the record, and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to obtain relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. L. ARON PEÑA JR. Justice Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2 (b). Delivered and filed on the 1st day of July, 2026. 2