Opinion issued September 16, 2021

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 21

- 00337

- CR

——————————— IN RE JOSEPH JEREMY MILLER , Relat or

Original Proceeding on Petition fo r Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDU M OPINION

In 200 2, a jury found r elator, J oseph Jeremy Miller
, guilty of the felony
offense of agg ravated sexual assault of a child 1 and assessed his puni shment at

confine ment for fifty y ears and a fine of $10,000

. 2 Appellant appealed the

1 See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. § 22 .021 (a)(1)(B) , (2)(B)

. 2 The underlying case is State of Texas v. Joseph Jeremy Miller
, C ause No. 917141
, pending in the 248th District Court of Harris County, Texas, t h e Honorable Hilar y Unger presi ding.2

conviction, and t he Thirteenth C ou r t of Appeals affirmed the conviction on August

12, 2004. 3

Re lator, i ncarcerated and acting pro se, has filed a petition for writ of

mandamus “ seeking an investigation into [his] case as a whole ” and asking t his

Court to “ read the [f]acts of [his] case a nd be open minded in it

. . . . ” Relator

s tates that he has filed th e mandamus p etit i on pursuant to T exas Code of Criminal

Proced ure arti c le 1 1.0 7 , section 3(c )

. 4

Relator ’ s mandamus p e tition is a c ollateral at tack on his final felony

conviction and, as su ch
, “fall[s] w ithin th e scope of a post

- convict i on wri t of

habeas corpus under ” Texa s Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.07. See, e.g. ,

In re Jones
, No

. 01

- 2 0

- 00558

- CR, 2 020 WL 4758431, *1 (Tex. App.

— Hou sto n
[1 st Dist.] Aug. 18, 2020
, orig. proceeding ) ( m em. op. , not de signated for

3 See Miller v. Sta te , No. 13

- 03

- 042

- CR, 2004 WL 1834410 (Tex. App.

— Corpus Chri sti

– Edinburg Aug. 12, 20 04, pet. ref ’ d) (mem. op., not designated for publication) . Pur sua nt to its docket equ ali zation authority, the S up r eme Court o f Texas transferred the appellant ’ s appeal to the Thirteenth Court of Appeals. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 73.001 (authorizing transfer of cases); see also T EX

. R

. A PP

. P. 41.3 (“In cases transfer red by the Supreme Court from one court of app ea l s to another, the court of appeals to which the case is transferred must decide the case in acc ordance with the precedent of the transferor court

. . . . ”).

4 Texas Code of C riminal Procedure a rticle 11.07 p ertains to an application for a writ of habea s c orpus “ in which the applicant seeks relief from a felony judgment impo sing a penalty other than death. ” See T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 11. 07
, § 1. “ Aft er final convic tion in any felony case, the writ must be made

re turna ble to the Court of Crimin al Appeals of Texas at Austin, Texas. ” Id. § 3 (a). Section 3(c) addres s es the dut y of the convicting court “ to decide w hether there are controvert ed, previousl y u n resolved facts material to the legality of th e applicant ’ s c onfinement. ” Id. § 3 ( c ).3

pub li c ation) ; see also T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 1 1 .07

. “It is well

established that only the Court of Criminal Appeals possesses the authorit y to grant

relief in a post

- c o nviction habeas corpus proceeding where there is a final felony

conviction.” Padi eu v. Court of Appeals of T ex ., Fifth Dist. , 392 S.W.3d 115, 117
(Tex. Crim. App. 2013) ( internal quotations omitted) . Thus, we do not hav e
jurisdict ion ov er relator ’ s manda mus petition

. See In re Br iscoe , 230 S.W.3d 1 96
,
196

– 97 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding) ( “ Article 11. 07
contains no role for the courts of appeals. ” ); In r e McAfee , 53 S.W.3d 715, 717
(Tex. App.

— Houston [1s t Dist.] 2001, orig. proc eeding ) ( “ [W] hile the courts of
appeals have m an d amus jurisdiction in criminal matters, only the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in fi nal post

- conviction felony pr oceedings

. ”).

We d ismiss the petition for l ack of jurisdiction

. All pending motions are

dismissed as moot.

P ER C URIAM

Pan el consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Coun tiss.
Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.2(b).