# In Re Keeter

> Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · August 4, 2003 · 134 S.W.3d 250

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9622537

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re Jackie Russell KEETER
- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)
- **Decided:** August 4, 2003
- **Citations:** 134 S.W.3d 250; 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 6857; 2003 WL 21468589
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Davis
- **Judges:** Davis, Vance, Gray
- **Cited by:** 191 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9622537

## Opinion text

OPINION ON REHEARING
REX D. DAVIS, Chief Justice.
By opinion and judgment dated June 25, 2003, this Court conditionally granted Jackie Russell Keeter’s petition for a writ of mandamus compelling Respondent, the Honorable James E. Morgan, Judge of the 220th District Court of Hamilton County, to rule on his motion for a bench warrant so that Keeter can make an appeal bond following the reversal of his conviction. Respondent has requested that the Court reconsider its ruling because of an underlying factual dispute.
To obtain mandamus relief, a petitioner must establish that: (1) “the act sought to be compelled is purely ‘ministerial’ and (2) “he has no other adequate legal remedy.” State ex rel. Rosenthal v. Poe, 98 S.W.3d 194, 198 (Tex.Crim.App.2003) (orig.proceeding) (quoting State ex rel. Hill v. Ct. of Apps. for the 5th Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex.Crim.App.2001) (orig.proceeding)). An act is not “purely ministerial” if the relevant facts are disputed. Hill, 34 S.W.3d at 927 -28 & n. 4 (citing State ex rel. Wade v. Mays, 689 S.W.2d 893, 898-900 (Tex.Crim.App.1985) (orig.proceeding)).
The parties dispute whether Keeter has presented any sureties to Respondent for his approval. Because of this factual dispute, Keeter is not entitled to the relief sought. Id.
Accordingly, we grant Respondent’s motion for rehearing and deny the petition.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9622537. Public record. Not legal advice.