Court Opinion

ID: 4320147
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-10-11 21:40:30.998355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:06:36.307767
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                            ____________________
                               NO. 09-18-00371-CR
                            ____________________

                           IN RE JOHN F. HAWKINS

________________________________________________________________________

                              Original Proceeding
                 163rd District Court of Orange County, Texas
                         Trial Cause No. B-030731-BR
________________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      John F. Hawkins seeks mandamus relief from the trial court in connection

with a post-conviction habeas corpus proceeding. See Tex. R. App. P. 52. The Court

of Criminal Appeals exclusively possesses the authority to grant relief in a post-

conviction habeas corpus proceeding where there is a final felony conviction. Padieu

v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013)

(orig. proceeding). In recognition of the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of

Criminal Appeals and the mandamus authority exercised by that court in the

protection of its habeas jurisdiction, we will not act on a mandamus petition filed to

                                          1
compel the trial court to act in a proceeding under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code

of Criminal Procedure. In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717–18 (Tex. App.—Houston

[1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07

(West 2015). “Should an applicant find it necessary to complain about an action or

inaction of the convicting court, the applicant may seek mandamus relief from the

Court of Criminal Appeals.” McAfee, 53 S.W.3d at 718. Accordingly, we dismiss

the petition for a writ of mandamus.

      PETITION DISMISSED.

                                                              PER CURIAM

Submitted on October 9, 2018
Opinion Delivered October 10, 2018
Do Not Publish

Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.

                                          2