# in Re Aundri Lewis

> Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · July 19, 2012

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3122623

## Case

- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
- **Decided:** July 19, 2012
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3122623

## Opinion text

Opinion issued July 19, 2012

In The

Court of Appeals
For The

First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-12-00575-CR
———————————
IN RE AUNDRI LEWIS, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Aundri Lewis, has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus,

contending that the trial court has abused its discretion in not ruling upon his

Motion for Indigent Hearing, in which he sought to obtain a free copy of trial

records, including the statement of facts, transcripts, and court reporter’s notes.*

*
The underlying case is State of Texas v. Aundri Lewis, Cause Number 1024294, in
230th District Court of Harris County, Texas, Honorable Belinda Hill, presiding.
Lewis asserts that he filed this motion in the trial court on March 7, 2011.

Lewis’s petition reflects that the motion about which he complains was filed

for the purpose of obtaining relief from his final felony conviction for aggravated

assault. See Lewis v. State, No. 01-05-00518-CR, 2006 WL 3751408 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 21, 2006, no pet.) (not designated for publication). The

exclusive post-conviction remedy from final felony convictions is a writ of habeas

corpus. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2011). Only the

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

corpus proceedings. See id.; Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of

Appeals for the Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); In re

McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig.

proceeding); see also Lewis v. State, No. 01-11-00152-CR, 2011 WL 5623416

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 17, 2011, no pet.) (not designated for

publication). Thus, this Court is without authority to grant the relief Lewis seeks.

See Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene, 910 S.W.2d at 483; In re McAfee, 53

S.W.3d at 717.

We dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Bland, Massengale, and Brown.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3122623. Public record. Not legal advice.