Background
Earnest Miles filed an original mandamus proceeding asking the Texas Sixth Court of Appeals to compel Judge Brad Morin of the 71st Judicial District Court in Harrison County to rule on Miles’s pending pro se motion. That motion sought an order requiring Miles’s counsel to surrender copies of his case file.
Miles included an unsworn declaration stating that his petition and exhibits were true and correct to the best of his knowledge. The documents attached to his petition, however, were neither certified nor sworn, and some appeared not to have been filed in the underlying proceeding.
The Court’s Holding
The court denied the mandamus petition because it did not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Miles failed to provide the certification required by Rule 52.3(k), which must state that the relator reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement is supported by competent evidence in the appendix or record. His general declaration that the materials were true and correct to the best of his knowledge was not substantially similar to the required certification.
Miles also failed to satisfy Rule 52.7(a)(1), which requires certified or sworn copies of every material document filed in the underlying proceeding. Emphasizing that authentication requirements are strictly enforced to protect the integrity of a party-assembled mandamus record, the court denied relief without reaching whether the trial court had improperly delayed ruling.
Key Takeaways
- A mandamus petition must contain the specific Rule 52.3(k) certification, or substantially similar language, confirming that every factual statement is supported by competent record evidence.
- A general unsworn declaration that a petition and its exhibits are true and correct does not necessarily satisfy Rule 52.3(k).
- Material documents in a mandamus record must be certified or sworn as required by Rule 52.7(a)(1).
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that procedural defects alone can defeat a mandamus petition before an appellate court considers the requested relief on the merits. Relators must authenticate the record and use the certification language required by the appellate rules.