Opinion issued April 7, 2011.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-11-00158-CR
———————————
in re Tracey W. Murphy, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Tracey W. Murphy, has petitioned this Court for a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum. A writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum is issued to compel an inmate to be brought before the trial court to testify. See Brewer v. Taylor, 737 S.W.2d 421, 424 n.3 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1987, no writ). Relator asserts that he should be released from the custody of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in order to personally present motions challenging his final felony conviction to the trial court or, alternatively, that arrangements must be made for relator to present the motions by videoconference.[1] The trial court has not set relator’s motions for hearing.
We note that relator’s petition does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.5 (a), (d) (requiring service of all documents presented to this Court). Even had relator filed a petition that complied with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, this Court is without jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. A court of appeals does not have original jurisdiction over habeas corpus proceedings in criminal matters. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 11.05, 11.07 (Vernon 2005); see also Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); Denby v. State, 627 S.W.2d 435, 435 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. proceeding).
Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Sharp, and Massengale.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
[1] In the underlying case, a jury convicted relator of robbery and assessed punishment at 25 years’ confinement. This Court affirmed relator’s conviction, and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused his petition for discretionary review. See Murphy v. State, No. 01-98-00786-CR, 2000 WL 1299489, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Sept. 14, 2000, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Our mandate issued on May 9, 2001.