In re Hernandez — Texas appeals court denied mandamus challenging rescission of a new-trial order and a later conviction

Case
In re Isaac Hernandez
Court
Texas First Court of Appeals
Judge
Justice Rivas-Molloy; Justice Guerra; Justice Gunn
Date Decided
September 15, 2026
Docket No.
01-26-00876-CR
Topics
Mandamus, New Trial, Criminal Judgment
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Isaac Hernandez sought mandamus relief in an underlying criminal case pending before Judge Kaycee Jones in the 228th District Court of Harris County, Texas.

Hernandez challenged the trial court’s oral order rescinding its July 24, 2026 order granting a new trial. He also challenged the judgment of conviction that the trial court signed on August 19, 2026.

The Court’s Holding

The Texas First Court of Appeals denied Hernandez’s petition for a writ of mandamus. The memorandum opinion did not provide substantive reasoning or separately analyze the challenged oral order and judgment of conviction.

The court also dismissed as moot all pending motions, including Hernandez’s emergency motion for temporary relief under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.10.

Key Takeaways

  • The court denied mandamus relief from the trial court’s rescission of its new-trial order and subsequent judgment of conviction.
  • The memorandum opinion stated no substantive basis for denying the petition.
  • The denial rendered Hernandez’s emergency request for temporary relief moot.

Why It Matters

The decision leaves the trial court’s challenged actions undisturbed, including the August 19, 2026 judgment of conviction. Because the court issued a brief, unpublished memorandum opinion without explaining its reasoning, the decision offers little broader guidance on when mandamus may be available to challenge the rescission of a new-trial order.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top