in Re: Charles Anthony Allen, Sr. ( 2014 )

Dismiss and Opinion Filed April 17, 2014
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00389-CV
IN RE CHARLES ANTHONY ALLEN, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 292nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CV99-01573-V
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices FitzGerald, Francis, and Lewis
Opinion by Justice FitzGerald
Relator filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The facts and issues are well known to
the parties, so we need not recount them herein. This Court does not have jurisdiction over
relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. While the courts of appeals have concurrent
mandamus jurisdiction with the court of criminal appeals in some post-conviction proceedings,
Padilla v. McDaniel, 122 S.W.3d 805, 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (forensic DNA testing), only
the court of criminal appeals has jurisdiction in cases collaterally attacking a final judgment of
conviction of a felony. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2010); In re
Turk, No. 14-09-00129-CR, 2009 WL 396197, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 19,
2009, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re Bailey, No. 14-06-00841-CV, 2006 WL 2827249, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715,
717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). “Article 11.07 contains no role for
the courts of appeals; the only courts referred to are the convicting court and the Court of
Criminal Appeals.” In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d at 718. Accordingly, we DISMISS the petition.
140389F.P05 /Kerry P. FitzGerald/
KERRY P. FITZGERALD
JUSTICE
–2–