in Re: Jamie Lee Bledsoe

NO

NO. 12-10-00275-CR

 

                         IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 

            TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

 

                                      TYLER, TEXAS

                                                                             '    

 

IN RE: JAMIE LEE BLEDSOE,

RELATOR                                                          '     ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

 

                                                                             '    

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

            In this original proceeding, Relator Jamie Lee Bledsoe complains, in part, that the District Clerk of Shelby County has failed to transmit Relator’s application for writ of habeas corpus and other related documents to the court of criminal appeals.  He seeks a writ of mandamus directing her to do so as required by Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.07.

            This court has the authority to issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or county court in its appellate district and all writs necessary to enforce this court's jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004).  In order for this court to issue a writ of mandamus  against a district clerk, it must be established that issuance of the writ is necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. See id.; In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692-93 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding).  Here, the action Relator seeks to compel relates to his application for a postconviction writ of habeas corpus. This court has no jurisdiction 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. Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 § 3 (Vernon Supp. 2009). Consequently, Relator has not demonstrated that the exercise of this court's mandamus authority against the District Clerk of Shelby County is necessary to enforce its jurisdiction.

            Although he does not name the trial court judge as a respondent, Relator also states in his mandamus petition that “Respondent” is “repeat[ed]ly denying Relator an[y] of his time credit that is owe[d] to him by law.”  This complaint necessarily relates to the trial court judge, and not the district clerk.  However, we do not have sufficient documentation to evaluate this complaint.  See In re Bledsoe, No. 12-10-00234-CR, 2010 WL 3000015, at *1 (Tex. App.–Tyler July 30, 2010, orig. proceeding). 

            For the foregoing reasons, the portion of Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the District Clerk of Shelby County is dismissed.  The portion complaining of the trial court judge is denied.

Opinion delivered August 25, 2010.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(DO NOT PUBLISH)