in Re Jimmy L. Chambers ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued August 28, 2018
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-18-00699-CR
    ———————————
    IN RE JIMMY L. CHAMBERS, Relator
    Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Relator, Jimmy L. Chambers, has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus,
    seeking to compel respondent, the Honorable Jan Krocker, to forward his “Writ of
    Habeas Corpus under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.07” to the Texas
    Court of Criminal Appeals.1
    1
    The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Jimmy L. Chambers, Case No. 615357-
    B, in the 184th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Jan Krocker
    presiding.
    Because his petition reflects that he has filed an article 11.07 application 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 (West 2015). Only the Texas Court of
    Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in post-conviction habeas corpus proceedings. See
    Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 
    392 S.W.3d 115
    , 117 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2013). “To complain about any action, or inaction, of the convicting court, the
    applicant may seek mandamus relief in the Court of Criminal Appeals.” In re
    Briscoe, 
    230 S.W.3d 196
    , 196–97 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig.
    proceeding); see, e.g., Benson v. Dist. Clerk, 
    331 S.W.3d 431
    , 433 (Tex. Crim. App.
    2011) (court of criminal appeals conditionally granted mandamus application
    against district clerk to compel performance of ministerial duty to receive and file
    article 11.07 application). This Court, however, has no authority to issue writs of
    mandamus in criminal law matters pertaining to proceedings under article 11.07. See
    In re 
    Briscoe, 230 S.W.3d at 197
    ; In re McAfee, 
    53 S.W.3d 715
    , 717 (Tex. App.—
    Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding).
    2
    Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for want of jurisdiction.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Lloyd.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-18-00699-CR

Filed Date: 8/28/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/29/2018