In In re Z.L.T., 124 S.W.3d 163, 166, 47 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 113 (Tex. 2003) the Court held that several factors should be considered when deciding whether to grant an inmate's request to appear. Id. These factors include the cost and inconvenience of transporting the inmate to court; the security risk and potential danger to the court and the public of allowing the inmate to attend court; whether the inmate's claims are substantial; whether a determination of the matter can reasonably be delayed until the inmate is released; whether the inmate can and will offer admissible, non-cumulative testimony that cannot be offered effectively by deposition, telephone, or otherwise; whether the inmate's presence is important in judging his demeanor and credibility compared with that of other witnesses; whether the trial is to the court or to a jury; and the inmate's probability of success on the merits. Id. at 165-66. When an inmate requests a bench warrant, the inmate bears the burden of identifying with sufficient specificity the grounds for establishing his right to relief. Id. at 166. As an inmate requesting a bench warrant, Mr. Ruiz must justify the need for his presence at trial. Id. The trial court does not have a duty to look beyond the bench warrant request and make an independent inquiry into the necessity of Mr. Ruiz's appearance, regardless of the content of Mr. Ruiz's request. Id. In Z.L.T., the appellant referenced the above factors, but did not provide any factual information showing why his interest in appearing outweighed the impact on the correctional system. Id. at 166. The Texas Supreme Court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant's request to appear because the appellant did not meet his burden. Id.