The opinion
Opinion issued January 23, 2025
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-24-00891-CR
———————————
IN RE WILLIAM SOLOMON LEWIS, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, William Solomon Lewis, proceeding pro se, filed an Application for
Writ of Mandamus, asking this Court to “direct[] the [trial] [j]udge for the 185th
District Court of Texas . . . to set for a hearing [his] Writ of Habeas Corpus at the
earliest day possible . . . .”1 The Court requested a response from the State. In its
1
The underlying case is The State of Texas v. William Solomon Lewis, Cause No.
1873581 and 1897489, pending in the 185th District Court of Harris County, Texas,
the Honorable Andrea Beall and the Honorable Marc Brown presiding.
response, the State argued that Relator’s mandamus petition should be denied as
moot because on December 16, 2024, the trial court scheduled a hearing on Relator’s
Writ of Habeas Corpus to be held on January 9, 2025. Together with the response,
the State submitted an order dated December 16, 2024 reflecting that a Writ of
Habeas Corpus was issued, returnable on January 9, 2025. On January 9, 2025, the
State filed a letter, stating that after conducting a hearing, the trial court denied on
the merits Relator’s Writ of Habeas Corpus.
This Court cannot decide a case that has become moot. See Heckman v.
Williamson Cnty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012); see also In re Salverson, No.
01-12-00384-CV, 2013 WL 557264, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 14,
2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). “If a proceeding becomes moot, the [C]ourt
must dismiss the proceeding . . . .” Id. Here, the trial court issued a writ and
scheduled a hearing on Relator’s Writ of Habeas Corpus (subsequently denying the
writ on the merits). Because Relator “has received the relief sought by h[is]
mandamus petition,” we must dismiss this mandamus proceeding as moot. In re
Haywood, No. 01-21-00645-CV, 2022 WL 10207672, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston
[1st Dist.] Oct. 18, 2022, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see In re Campos, No. 01-
21-00247-CV, 2022 WL 3650129, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 25,
2022, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (dismissing mandamus petition as moot where
relators “received the relief requested in their mandamus petition” pursuant to
2
subsequent trial court order); see also In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d
732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding) (“A case becomes moot if a controversy
ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the legal proceedings . . . .”).
We dismiss the Application for Writ of Mandamus as moot. All pending
motions are denied as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Johnson, and Dokupil.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
3