Opinion issued December 15, 2020
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-20-00786-CR
NO. 01-20-00787-CR
NO. 01-20-00788-CR
———————————
IN RE BRADY JOSEPH RAY, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Brady Joseph Ray, has been charged with the felony offense of
assault against a public servant. Ray, acting pro se, has filed this original proceeding
consisting of (1) a petition for writ of mandamus requesting that our Court compel
the district attorney in the underlying case to produce certain purported evidence
requested by Ray and (2) an original application for writ of habeas corpus.1 We
dismiss the original proceeding for want of jurisdiction.
This Court’s mandamus jurisdiction is governed by Section 22.221 of the
Texas Government Code. Section 22.221 expressly limits the mandamus jurisdiction
of the courts of appeals to: (1) writs against a district court judge or a county court
judge in the court of appeals’ district; and (2) all writs necessary to enforce the court
of appeals’ jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221. District attorneys are not a
district court or county court judge in this court’s district, and Ray has not shown
that the issuance of a writ compelling the requested relief is necessary to enforce this
court’s jurisdiction. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of
mandamus against the district attorney in the underlying case. See TEX. GOV’T CODE
§ 22.221. Accordingly, we dismiss Ray’s petition for writ of mandamus for want of
jurisdiction.
Concerning Ray’s request for pre-trial habeas relief, courts of appeals do not
have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal matters; original jurisdiction is
vested in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the district courts, the county courts,
or a judge in those courts. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.05; In re Ayers, 515
S.W.3d 356, 356 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.) (per curiam). In
1
The underlying case is State of Texas v. Brady J. Ray, cause numbers
1635384, 1635385, and 1635386, pending in the 339th District Court of
Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Jesse McClure III presiding.
2
criminal matters, our habeas corpus jurisdiction is appellate only, and we do not have
original habeas corpus jurisdiction. Ex parte Denby, 627 S.W.2d 435, 435 (Tex.
App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. proceeding); see also Chavez v. State, 132
S.W.3d 509, 510 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (citing Tex. Gov’t
Code § 22.221) (“A court of appeals does not have original habeas corpus
jurisdiction in felony cases.”). We lack jurisdiction over this attempt to seek pre-
conviction habeas relief directly from this Court. In re Lozano, No. 14–12–00049–
CR, 2012 WL 274076, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 31, 2012, orig.
proceeding) (“To the degree relator seeks release from custody, relator is seeking
pretrial habeas corpus relief over which this court does not have jurisdiction.”)
(citing Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991)). Accordingly, we dismiss Ray’s application for writ of habeas corpus for
want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Adams.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
3