In re Jones

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — EdinburgFeb 22, 2007
No. 13-07-106-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 22, 2007)

No. 13-07-106-CR

February 22, 2007. DO NOT PUBLISH. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the 156 th District Court San Patricio County, Texas.

Before Chief Justice VALDEZ, Justices YANEZ and VELA. Memorandum Opinion PER CURIAM.



Relator, Cecil C. Jones, Jr., filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in this Court on February 15, 2007. In this original proceeding, relator contends that the trial court made erroneous findings and failed to analyze and apply the law correctly with regard to relator's previously filed post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. To obtain mandamus relief in criminal law matters in the courts of appeals, a relator must establish that (1) the act he seeks to compel is ministerial, rather than discretionary in nature, and (2) no other adequate remedy at law is available. State ex rel. Hill v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 67 S.W.3d 177, 180 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001); see Dickens v. Court of Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial Dist. of Tex., 727 S.W.2d 542, 548 (Tex.Crim.App. 1987). However, the courts of appeal have no authority to issue writs of mandamus in criminal matters pertaining to proceedings under article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure; only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proceedings. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, §§ 3, 5 (Vernon 2005); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). Accordingly, we DISMISS relator's petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).