in Re Anthony Richard Woodard

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 16, 2015
• Docket: 14-15-00555-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 16, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-15-00555-CR

IN RE ANTHONY RICHARD WOODARD, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 351st District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1390747

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 30, 2015, relator Anthony Richard Woodard filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel Stan Stanart, Harris County Clerk, to transmit to the Court of Criminal Appeals a copy of relator’s application for writ of habeas corpus, any answers filed, and a certificate reciting the date upon which the trial court found that no controverted, previously unresolved facts material to the legality of relator’s confinement exist. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 § 3(c) (West 2015).

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 Ann. § 22.221. The county clerk is not a district court or county court judge in this court’s district, and relator has not shown that the issuance of a writ compelling the requested relief is necessary to enforce this court’s appellate jurisdiction.

Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jamison and Busby.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).