Deny and Opinion Filed December 1, 2025
S
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-25-01534-CR
IN RE ROBERT JOSEPH SCHMITT, Relator Original Proceeding from the 296th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 296-81160-01
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Miskel, Kennedy, and Lee Opinion by Justice Kennedy
Before the Court is relator's petition for writ of mandamus. Relator seeks an order compelling the trial court to rule on his "Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment to Correct an Unauthorized and Illegal Sentence That Applicant Was Not Legally Eligible to Receive as a Matter of Law with Brief in Support," which was filed February 12, 2025. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. A relator bears the burden of providing the Court with a record that is sufficient to show he is entitled to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); see TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(B), 52.7(a). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure require a relator to file with his petition (1)
"a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator's claim
1
-2-
for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding." TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). The rules further require a relator to file an appendix that contains "a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any other document showing the matter complained of." TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(B). Rule 52.3(j) requires that "[t]he person filing the petition must certify that he or she has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record." TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j). Because the parties in an original proceeding assemble their own record, this Court strictly enforces the requirements of Rule 52 to ensure the integrity of the mandamus record. In re Vasquez, No. 05-15-00592-CV, 2015 WL 2375504, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 18, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Relator attached copies of documents to his petition in an appendix, but they are not certified or sworn copies. Certified copies are ordered from the appropriate court clerk. See In re Hamilton, No. 05-19-01458-CV, 2020 WL 64679, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 7, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Documents become sworn copies when they are attached to an affidavit or unsworn declaration stating under penalty of perjury that the person making the affidavit or unsworn declaration has personal knowledge that the documents attached are true and correct copies of the originals. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 132.001(c)(2); In re Hamilton, 2020 WL 64679, at *1; In re Butler, 270 S.W.3d 757, 758 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding). In this case, the documents are not certified copies or sworn
-3-
copies. The petition also does not include the certification required by Rule 52.3(j). Without a certified petition and an authenticated record, relator has failed to carry his burden to provide a sufficient record. In re Skinner, No. 05-23-00930-CV, 2023 WL 6618295, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 11, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). We deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus.
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)
/Nancy E. Kennedy/
NANCY E. KENNEDY
JUSTICE