Opinion issued October 19, 2006
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NO. 01-06-00847-CR
____________
IN RE DONALD J. RANDLE, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Donald J. Randle, has filed in this Court a pro se motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus. Such a motion is no longer required under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Tex. R. App. P. 52.1 (An original appellate proceeding...is commenced by filing a petition with the clerk of the appropriate appellate court.). Accordingly, we consider the motion as a petition for writ of mandamus.
Relator complains that he was convicted in the respondent trial court in 1994 of the felony offense of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to confinement for 45 years. He now asserts that the charging instrument in that case had a defective enhancement paragraph and prays “that his honorable court grant him all relief he is entitled to.” We deny the petition.
This Court has no authority to issue writs of mandamus in criminal law matters pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings seeking relief from final felony judgments. That jurisdiction lies exclusively with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See 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); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717-18 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 3 (Vernon Supp. 2005).
We dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Jennings, and Higley.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).