Opinion issued December 22, 2015
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-15-00696-CR
———————————
IN RE SAMUEL ROY JACKSON, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Samuel Roy Jackson, incarcerated and proceeding pro se, has filed a
petition for a writ of mandamus, seeking issuance of a writ directing respondent to
consider and rule on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, motion for an
evidentiary hearing, and motion for a bench warrant.1 We dismiss relator’s petition
for a writ of mandamus.
Because relator’s petition reflects that he has filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus in the trial court, his mandamus petition relates to a pending
post-conviction habeas corpus application involving a final felony conviction. See
TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (Vernon 2015). This Court does not have
jurisdiction to grant relator’s requested relief; only the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction habeas corpus proceedings. See
Padieu v. Ct. App. of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013).
Accordingly, any complaints about inaction on matters relating to relator’s post-
conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus must be brought in the Texas Court
of Criminal Appeals. See In re Briscoe, 230 S.W.3d 196, 196–97 (Tex. App.—
Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding) (“Article 11.07 contains no role for the
courts of appeals.”); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding) (noting that “only the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proceedings”). We have no
authority to issue writs of mandamus in criminal law matters relating to final post-
conviction felony proceedings. See In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d at 717.
1
Relator’s petition identifies the underlying case as Cause No. 913043, in the 183rd
District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Vanessa Velasquez presiding.
Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus for want of
jurisdiction and dismiss all pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Bland.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
in Re Samuel Roy Jackson
Combined Opinion