In Re Francisco Gibran Morales v. State of Texas - Mandamus Petition Denied
Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District, denied a petition for writ of mandamus filed by Francisco Gibran Morales. The relator contended that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty and abused its discretion in issuing orders related to a modification ruling and possession of a minor child.
What changed
The Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District, has denied a petition for writ of mandamus filed by Francisco Gibran Morales in the case In Re Francisco Gibran Morales v. the State of Texas. The relator alleged that the trial court failed to perform a ministerial duty by not signing a written order reflecting a verbal modification ruling, abused its discretion by issuing orders based on a different possession order, and erred by issuing writs of attachment and an interim possession order for a minor child without an evidentiary hearing.
This denial means the relator's arguments were not persuasive enough to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. Regulated entities involved in similar litigation should note that mandamus relief is difficult to obtain, requiring a showing of abuse of discretion and lack of an adequate remedy on appeal. The court's decision reinforces the high bar for such petitions in Texas appellate courts.
Source document (simplified)
Jump To
Top Caption Disposition Lead Opinion
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
March 26, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
In Re Francisco Gibran Morales v. the State of Texas
Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District
- Citations: None known
- Docket Number: 13-26-00210-CV
- Nature of Suit: Mandamus
Disposition: Motion or Writ Denied
Disposition
Motion or Writ Denied
Lead Opinion
NUMBER 13-26-00210-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
IN RE FRANCISCO GIBRAN MORALES
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices West and Cron
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Tijerina1
By petition for writ of mandamus, relator Francisco Gibran Morales contends that:
(1) the trial court failed to perform the ministerial duty of signing the written order reflecting
the verbal August 30, 2024 modification ruling; (2) the trial court abused its discretion by
issuing orders premised on a different controlling possession order after rendering the
August 30, 2024 modification ruling; and (3) the trial court abused its discretion by issuing
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not
required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R.
47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
writs of attachment and an interim possession order for the minor child without conducting
an evidentiary hearing.
Mandamus is an extraordinary and discretionary remedy. See In re Allstate Indem.
Co., 622 S.W.3d 870, 883 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding); In re Garza, 544 S.W.3d 836,
840 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148
S.W.3d 124, 138 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). The relator must show that (1) the trial
court abused its discretion, and (2) the relator lacks an adequate remedy on appeal. In re
USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 624 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding); In re
Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d at 135–36; Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833,
839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). “The relator bears the burden of proving these two
requirements.” In re H.E.B. Grocery Co., 492 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig.
proceeding) (per curiam); Walker, 827 S.W.2d at 840.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus
and the response filed by real party in interest Amalia Zarahi Gracia a/k/a Amalia Sarahi
Gracia Bermudez, is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to obtain relief.
Accordingly, we lift the stay previously imposed in this case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(b).
We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
JAIME TIJERINA
Chief Justice
Delivered and filed on the
26th day of March, 2026.
2
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get Courts & Legal alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when Texas Court of Appeals publishes new changes.