In Re Devoris Newson v. State of Texas - Mandamus

Texas Court of Appeals

Filed March 9th, 2026

Detected March 12th, 2026

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals denied Devoris Newson's petition for a writ of mandamus. The court found that Newson failed to establish entitlement to the relief sought, which included the appointment of counsel and a ruling on his motion for a new trial. Any pending motions were dismissed as moot.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The Texas Court of Appeals, Eighth District (El Paso), denied a petition for writ of mandamus filed by Devoris Newson in the case In Re Devoris Newson v. the State of Texas. The court determined that Newson, who is representing himself, did not meet the requirements for mandamus relief, which include demonstrating a failure to perform a ministerial duty or a clear abuse of discretion by the trial court, and the lack of an adequate remedy by appeal. The disposition indicates the motion or writ was denied, and any pending motions were dismissed as moot.

This decision means that the relator's request for the court to mandate the appointment of counsel and rule on his amended motion for a new trial has been rejected. For legal professionals and criminal defendants involved in similar appellate proceedings, this case underscores the stringent requirements for obtaining mandamus relief in Texas courts. No specific compliance actions are required for regulated entities, as this is a judicial decision concerning a specific case. The effective date of the court's decision is March 9, 2026.

Source document (simplified)

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.

Join Free.law Now

March 9, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

In Re Devoris Newson v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)

Citations: None known
Docket Number: 08-26-00100-CR
Nature of Suit: Mandamus
Disposition: Motion or Writ Denied
Opinion
Authorities (3)
Cited By (0)
Summaries (0)
Similar Cases (0)
PDF

Disposition

Motion or Writ Denied

Lead Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
————————————

No. 08-26-00100-CR
————————————

In re Devoris Newson, Relator

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS

M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N
Relator Devoris Newson, who is representing himself, filed a petition for writ of mandamus

on February 26, 2026, asking “that the courts be mandated to appoint counsel and rule on amended

motion for new trial, holding a proper hearing.” He represents in the petition that his motions for

new trial were “properly filed” (which included a request for new counsel), that the judge “was

put on notice,” and that the trial court had the ministerial duty to rule on the “last motion filed prior

to hearing.”
A relator seeking mandamus relief must establish that the trial court failed to perform a

ministerial duty or committed a clear abuse of discretion and that the relator lacks an adequate

remedy by way of appeal. See In re UpCurve Energy Partners LLC, 632 S.W.3d 254, 256

(Tex. App.—El Paso 2021, orig. proceeding); In re Phillips, 496 S.W.3d 769, 774 (Tex. 2016); In

re Nationwide Ins. Co. of Am., 494 S.W.3d 708, 712 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding). 1 After

reviewing Newson’s petition for writ of mandamus, the Court has determined that Newson has not

shown his entitlement to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is

denied. Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

LISA J SOTO, Justice

March 9, 2026

Before Palafox and Soto, JJ., Benavides, J. (Senior Judge)
Benavides, J. (Senior Judge), sitting by assignment

(Do Not Publish)

1
The relator must provide the Court with a record sufficient to establish his right to relief. Walker v. Packer, 827
S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992). Moreover, the record must conform to the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure.