(1) While Adams properly invoked rule 19 to seek review of the justice court’s separation of powers decision, he was not entitled to extraordinary reliefon a separate of powers claim because Adams had not shown it was likely that the justice court would accept his plea on the original DUI charge even if the prosecutorial consent law was declared unconstitutional.
(2) Adams was not entitled to extraordinary relief on due process claim because he didn’t address the rationale for the justice court’s decision.