Opinion

in Re Darren McAfee

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Dec 4, 2008
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 35.2%

The opinion

Opinion issued December 4, 2008

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-08-00903-CR

____________

IN RE DARREN MCAFEE, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Darrren McAfee, has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus

complaining that he has not been provided a free transcript of the record, in trial court

cause number 83316, to use in preparing a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus.

Relator also complains that neither the District Clerk nor the trial court has responded

to his requests for an indigency hearing. We note that relator appealed his conviction

in cause number 833161, and that the appeal was assigned to this Court as appellate

number 01-00-00470-CR. We issued an opinion affirming the judgment of the trial

court in cause number 833161. McAfee v. State , No. 01-00-00470-CR , 2001 WL

619543 , (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] , 2001, pet. ref’d) (not designated for

publication). Our mandate issued on July18, 2002 . The conviction in cause number

833161 is final. This Court has mandamus jurisdiction over a district court judge or county court

judge in our district, and all writs necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See Tex.

Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2008). We have no authority to issue a writ of

mandamus to compel a district court judge to rule on matters related to a petition for

writ of habeas corpus in which the judgment of conviction is final. In re McAfee , 53

S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). Nor do

we have authority to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless such is

necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. In re Coronado , 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex.

App.—San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). This is because jurisdiction to grant

post-conviction habeas corpus relief in felony cases rests exclusively with the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 3 (Vernon

Supp. 2008); Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the

Eighth District , 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995).

Therefore, the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of

jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Taft, Keyes, and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.