in Re Anthony Washington

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 9, 2012
Docket10-12-00130-CR
StatusPublished

This text of in Re Anthony Washington (in Re Anthony Washington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
in Re Anthony Washington, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-12-00130-CR

IN RE ANTHONY WASHINGTON

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Anthony Washington presents his petition for writ of mandamus requesting this

Court to compel the Judge of the 40th District Court in Ellis County, Texas to take

judicial notice of the record in Washington’s underlying criminal conviction and give

findings of fact and conclusions of law as to each of his seven grounds alleged in his

article 11.07 post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus. See TEX. CODE CRIM.

PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2011). In the alternative, Washington requests this

Court to compel the judge to set his article 11.07 application for a hearing. There are

procedural problems with Washington’s petition but we use Rule 2 to look beyond

those problems and dismiss the petition. TEX. R. APP. P. 2. This Court, as an intermediate appellate court, has no jurisdiction over post-

conviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts.

11.05; 11.07, § 3(a), (b) (West Supp. 2011); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding) (noting that "only the Texas Court of

Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proceedings"). Thus,

we also lack jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief in matters related to a post-

conviction writ application. See McCree v. Hampton, 824 S.W.2d 578, 579 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1992) (Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction to order the trial court to rule on

applicant's post-conviction writ of habeas corpus).

Because Washington’s petition for writ of mandamus relates to his post-

conviction writ of habeas corpus, we have no jurisdiction to grant any relief he requests.

Accordingly, we dismiss Washington’s petition for writ of mandamus.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed May 9, 2012 Do not publish [OT06]

In re Washington Page 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re McAfee
53 S.W.3d 715 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)
McCree v. Hampton
824 S.W.2d 578 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re Anthony Washington, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-anthony-washington-texapp-2012.