In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-09-00135-CR ______________________________
IN RE:
JASON BLAKENEY
Original Mandamus Proceeding
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jason Blakeney has filed a petition for writ of mandamus with this Court. It is related to a recent proceeding before this Court in which we dismissed Blakeney's appeal. Blakeney had asked the trial court to grant a Bill of Review in which he could attack his 2002 conviction for murder. The trial court denied his motion, and we dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction, noting that collateral post-conviction remedies are limited to habeas corpus, pursuant to Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure through the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2008). (1)
We grant the extraordinary relief of mandamus only when the trial court has clearly abused its discretion or failed to perform a mandatory act and the relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Transcontinental Realty Investors, Inc., 271 S.W.3d 270, 271 (Tex. 2008); In re Team Rocket, L.P., 256 S.W.3d 257 (Tex. 2008).
It is difficult to ascertain Blakeney's argument from this petition. He lists a number of legal concepts with definitions: void orders, due process, waiver of governmental immunity, the supremacy clause, fundamental rights to access to courts, and "court crime," but without explaining how any of those require us to order the trial court to withdraw his "void" order denying bill of review. Blakeney appears to be arguing that, because we could not address his effort to obtain a bill of review of his criminal conviction by appeal, we should be able to do so in a mandamus. That does not necessarily follow.
To be entitled to mandamus relief, Blakeney would (among other things) necessarily have to show an error by the trial court in its actions. He has not done so. As we previously stated, a bill of review is not an available means to attack a criminal conviction. Thus, the trial court did not err by denying Blakeney's motion. The requirements necessary to obtain extraordinary relief have not been met.
We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
Josh R. Morriss, III
Chief Justice
Date Submitted: July 14, 2009
Date Decided: July 15, 2009
Do Not Publish
1. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and lower courts have recognized that "the exclusive post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas courts is through a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07." Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 525 n.8 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); accord In re Harrison, 187 S.W.3d 199, 200 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2006, orig. proceeding).
">
Date Submitted: October 15, 2001
Date Decided: October 16, 2001
Do Not Publish