Opinion issued October 7, 2009
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NO. 01-09-00698-CR
____________
IN RE DONALD FRED HOBBS, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Donald Fred Hobbs, has filed in this Court a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, asking that we order respondent district clerk to provide him with documents from court records related to his post conviction writ of habeas corpus. We dismiss the petition.
This Court has mandamus jurisdiction against 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 against a district clerk except to protect our jurisdiction. In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). Relator has not shown that the issuance of a writ of mandamus is necessary to enforce this Court’s jurisdiction.
According to the petition, the documents relator requested from the respondent are for use in an article 11.07 post conviction writ of habeas corpus. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2008). We have 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).
The petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Any pending motions are denied as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Hanks, and Alcala.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).