Opinion

in Re Paul Sturgeon

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Apr 7, 2015
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 41.2%

The opinion

Opinion issued April 7, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-15-00242-CR

———————————

IN RE PAUL STURGEON, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Paul Sturgeon, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking an

order directing respondent to make appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of

law concerning a pending habeas corpus application.1

1

Relator’s petition identifies the underlying case as Cause No. 1280723-A, in the

248th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Katherine Cabiness

presiding.

Because relator asserts that he has filed an article 11.07 application for writ

of habeas corpus in the trial court, his mandamus petition relates to a pending

post-conviction habeas corpus application involving a final felony conviction. This

Court does not have jurisdiction to grant relator’s requested relief. Only the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction habeas corpus

proceedings. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2014);

Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2013). Accordingly, any complaints about inaction on matters relating to

relator’s post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus must be brought in

the Court of Criminal Appeals. See In re Briscoe, 230 S.W.3d 196, 196–97 (Tex.

App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding) (“Article 11.07 contains no

role for the courts of appeals.”); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding) (noting that “only the Texas Court of

Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proceedings”).

We have no authority to issue writs of mandamus in criminal law matters relating

to final post-conviction felony proceedings. See In re Briscoe, 230 S.W.3d at 196.

2

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for lack of

jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Brown and Lloyd.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

3

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.