Opinion
No. 09-06-235 CV
Opinion Delivered November 2, 2006.
Original Proceeding.
Writ Denied.
Before McKEITHEN, C.J., GAULTNEY and HORTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this mandamus proceeding, Gerald B. Wilson seeks to compel the trial court to issue a bench warrant and to conduct a hearing on Wilson's motion for reconsideration of his motion for judgment nunc pro tunc. Wilson contends he properly filed the motions and that the trial court's refusal to consider the motions deprived him of due process. He also argues the trial court failed to credit his sentence appropriately.
Wilson contends he is entitled to 133 days of jail-time credit on his sentences for the period of time from the date of his arrest in Travis County on unrelated charges until the date of sentence in Cause Nos. 17,252 and 17,253. Wilson concedes the trial court awarded 27 days of credit on Cause No. 17,252 on August 23, 2005, and ordered the same amount of credit on Cause No. 17,253 on August 30, 2005. Wilson's immediate complaint contends that the trial court failed to entertain the motion for reconsideration Wilson filed on November 15, 2005. The trial court denied the motion for reconsideration on October 19, 2006. Considering Wilson filed the motion more than thirty days after the trial court ruled on the motion for judgment nunc pro tunc, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to reconsider its ruling. See generally Tex.R.App.P. 21.4; Awadelkariem v. State, 974 S.W.2d 721, 728 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998) (applying Rule 21 to an order granting a new trial).
Wilson failed to establish that he was arrested or formally detained in Cause Nos. 17,252 and 17,253 for any period of time for which he has not been granted credit. Compare In re Daisy, 156 S.W.3d 922, 924 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005, orig. proceeding) (relator was entitled to a nunc pro tunc order where the record showed relator was confined on the case for the time period at issue).
The relator has not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought in the petition. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.