Lagaite v. Ernst

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 2 MOTION/APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and dismissing 1 Application for Writ of Mandamus. Case closed 2/3/2015.(Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(rhawkins, 4)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
LUIS SANTOS LAGAITE,

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Petitioner,
VS.
EARL ERNST,
Respondent.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:13-CV-3577

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Kenneth Santos Lagaite, an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice - Correctional Institutions Division (TDCJ-CID), proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, filed an application for a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Earl Ernst of the 278th
District Court of Walker County, Texas, to perform a judicial duty. (Docket No. 1.) Because the
Court lacks jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against a state court judge, it will dismiss
Petitioner’s application with prejudice.
I. Analysis
Petitioner seeks to compel Judge Earl Ernst of the 278th Judicial District Court of Walker
County, Texas, to review the legality of Petitioner’s criminal conviction in that court, based on a
recent United States Supreme Court opinion in Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376, 182 L. Ed.2d
398 (2012). Petitioner asserts that he is entitled to habeas corpus relief based on that opinion and
that Judge Ernst has refused to consider his application for such relief.
Federal district courts are courts of limited statutory jurisdiction. See Dunn-McCampbell
Royalty Interest, Inc. v. Nat=l Park Serv., 112 F.3d 1283, 1286 (5th Cir. 1997); Veldhoen v. U.S.
Coast Guard, 35 F.3d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1994). The only federal statute conferring authority on
federal district courts to issue writs of mandamus is 28 U.S.C. Section 1361. That statute
1/2

specifically provides that A[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the
nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof
to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.@ Dunn-McCampbell Royalty Interest, Inc., 112 F.3d at
1288 (quoting 28 U.S.C. ' 1361 (emphasis added)). The respondent in this case is a judge of the
278th Judicial District Court of Walker County, Texas, who is not a federal officer, agent, or
employee and is not subject to the statutory mandamus authority of this Court. Thus, this Court
lacks jurisdiction to entertain Petitioner’s application for mandamus relief.
II. Order
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
(1)

Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Docket No. 2) is GRANTED.

(2)

Petitioner’s Application for Writ of Mandamus (Docket No. 1) is DISMISSED
with prejudice for want of subject matter jurisdiction.

(3)

This case is CLOSED.

SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this 3rd day of February, 2015.

___________________________________
MELINDA HARMON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2