Dismiss and Opinion Filed May 21, 2014.
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00601-CV
IN RE RUBEN GARCES MORENO, Relator
Original Proceeding from the Criminal District Court No. 4
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F-0251303
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Myers
Opinion by Justice Myers
Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that this Court order the trial
court to rule on his petition for writ of habeas corpus, which he says he filed in the trial court on
January 13, 2014. We do not have jurisdiction over relator’s petition. Article 11.07 contains no
role for the courts of appeals; the only courts referred to are the convicting court and the Court of
Criminal Appeals. In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no
pet.) While the courts of appeals have concurrent mandamus jurisdiction with the Court of
Criminal Appeals in some post-conviction proceedings, Padilla v. McDaniel, 122 S.W.3d 805,
808 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (forensic DNA testing), only the Court of Criminal Appeals has
jurisdiction in final post-conviction habeas corpus proceedings. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN.
art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2010); In re Turk, No. 14-09-00129-CR, 2009 WL 396197, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 19, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re Bailey, No. 14-06-00841-
CV, 2006 WL 2827249, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding) (mem.
op.); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d at 717. Any complaints about action or inaction on a matter
related to a post-conviction petition for writ of habeas corpus, must be brought by mandamus to
the Court of Criminal Appeals and not to this Court. In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d at 717. Because
relator’s petition for mandamus arises from the trial court’s failure to rule on his post-conviction
application for writ of habeas corpus, we do not have jurisdiction over the complaint.
Accordingly, we DISMISS relator’s petition.
/Lana Myers/
LANA MYERS
JUSTICE
140601F.P05
–2–