Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 16, 2006.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-06-00623-CV
____________
IN RE CEDRIC SANTOSCOY,
Relator
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
On July 18, 2006, relator Cedric Santoscoy, an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court, requesting we order the trial court to rescind its judgment in the underlying case, Cause No. 755418, in which relator was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Relator claims the trial court=s judgment is void as a violation of the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment because a venire member was replaced after the venire panel had been sworn.[1] However, relator=s argument is, in effect, a collateral attack on his conviction. Under Texas law, the exclusive method for a person confined under a final felony conviction to collaterally attack the conviction is to file an application for a writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon 2005); Ex Parte Adams, 768 S.W.2d 281, 287 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989); McBride v. State, 114 S.W.3d 556, 557 (Tex. App.CAustin 2002, no pet.). Therefore, because this Court does not have jurisdiction to address relator=s contention, we dismiss the petition. See 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); see, e.g., Watson v. State, 96 S.W.3d 497, 500 (Tex. App.CAmarillo 2002, pet. ref=d) (construing points of error praying for release from incarceration as requesting habeas corpus relief, and dismissing for lack of jurisdiction).
Accordingly, relator=s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Petition Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 16, 2006.
Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Edelman, and Frost.
[1]This Court overruled relator=s argument in the appeal of his conviction. See Santoscoy v. State, No. 14-98-00126-CR, 1999 WL 1123048, at *4 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] Dec. 9, 1999, pet. ref=d).