What did the court decide?

The court denied both the petition for a writ of mandamus and the alternative petition for a writ of prohibition because the petitioner did not show he was entitled to such extraordinary relief.

Who is affected by this decision?

The immediate effect is on Shawn L. Sanders and the ongoing criminal case in Bexar County; the trial court proceedings remain undisturbed.

What happens next in the underlying criminal case?

Because the appellate court denied the extraordinary relief, proceedings in Cause No. 2023-CR-3165 in the 226th Judicial District Court may continue unless the trial court or another court orders otherwise.

Can this decision be appealed?

Mandamus and prohibition denials by the court of appeals are generally final as to that extraordinary relief, though in some circumstances a petitioner may seek review by the Texas Supreme Court.

In Re Shawn L. Sanders v. the State of Texas

Docket 04-26-00233-CR

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

Criminal AppealDenied

Filed: Apr 8, 2026 · 3 weeks ago
Jurisdiction: Texas
Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
Type: Lead Opinion
Case type: Criminal Appeal
Disposition: Denied
Docket: 04-26-00233-CR

Original proceeding: petition for writ of mandamus or, alternatively, writ of prohibition filed in appellate court challenging matters in a pending criminal prosecution.

Summary

The Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, denied Shawn L. Sanders's petition seeking either a writ of mandamus or, alternatively, a writ of prohibition. Sanders filed the petition on March 23, 2026, asking the appellate court to intervene in underlying criminal case No. 2023-CR-3165 in Bexar County. After reviewing the petition and record, the court concluded Sanders did not establish entitlement to the extraordinary relief requested and therefore denied both the mandamus and prohibition petitions without publishing an opinion.

Issues Decided

Whether the petitioner established entitlement to a writ of mandamus to compel action in the underlying criminal case.
Whether the petitioner established entitlement to a writ of prohibition to prevent further proceedings in the underlying criminal case.

Court's Reasoning

The court reviewed the petition and the record and concluded the petitioner failed to meet the high burden required for extraordinary relief under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Because Sanders did not demonstrate the necessary entitlement to either mandamus or prohibition, the court had no basis to grant relief. The court therefore denied both petitions.

Authorities Cited

Texas Rules of Appellate ProcedureTEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a)

Parties

Petitioner: Shawn L. Sanders
Respondent: The State of Texas
Judge: Benjamin Robertson

Key Dates

Petition filed in appellate court: 2026-03-23
Opinion delivered and filed: 2026-04-08

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult trial counsel
Sanders should confer with his criminal defense attorney about the status of the underlying case and any other available remedies, including further motions in the trial court or potential review by the Texas Supreme Court.
2
Consider petition for review
If appropriate, consider filing a petition for review with the Texas Supreme Court challenging the denial of extraordinary relief; note the strict standards and deadlines for such filings.
3
Proceed with trial-court strategy
Prepare for continued proceedings in the 226th Judicial District Court, including any necessary pretrial motions, hearings, or trial preparations since the appellate court left the trial court's process intact.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The court denied both the petition for a writ of mandamus and the alternative petition for a writ of prohibition because the petitioner did not show he was entitled to such extraordinary relief.
Who is affected by this decision?: The immediate effect is on Shawn L. Sanders and the ongoing criminal case in Bexar County; the trial court proceedings remain undisturbed.
What happens next in the underlying criminal case?: Because the appellate court denied the extraordinary relief, proceedings in Cause No. 2023-CR-3165 in the 226th Judicial District Court may continue unless the trial court or another court orders otherwise.
Can this decision be appealed?: Mandamus and prohibition denials by the court of appeals are generally final as to that extraordinary relief, though in some circumstances a petitioner may seek review by the Texas Supreme Court.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                        San Antonio, Texas

                                   MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                            No. 04-26-00233-CR

                                       IN RE Shawn L. SANDERS

                                            Original Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting:          Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
                  Irene Rios, Justice
                  Adrian A. Spears II, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 8, 2026

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE WRIT OF
PROHIBITION DENIED

           On March 23, 2026, relator, Shawn L. Sanders, filed a petition for writ of mandamus or

prohibition and accompanying record. Having considered the petition and record provided, we

have determined that Sanders has not established that he is entitled to the relief requested. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 52.8(a). The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. The alternative petition for writ

of prohibition is denied.

                                                        PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH



1
 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2023-CR-3165, styled The State of Texas v. Shawn Lee Sanders, pending in
the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Benjamin Robertson presiding.