in Re: Eric Murphy v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 25, 2002
Docket08-02-00172-CR
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Eric Murphy v. State (in Re: Eric Murphy v. State) 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: Eric Murphy v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

                                                            COURT OF APPEALS

                                                    EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                                               EL PASO, TEXAS

                                                                              )

                                                                              )               No.  08-02-00172-CR

IN RE:  ERIC MURPHY                                       )     AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

                                                                              )                  IN MANDAMUS

O P I N I O N

This is an original proceeding in mandamus.  Relator, Eric Murphy (AMurphy@) seeks a writ of mandamus from this Court to review the judgment and opinion of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Midland/Odessa Division) in cause number MO-99-CA-075.  For the reason stated below, we dismiss the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.


Before this Court can issue a writ of mandamus, it must have the authority to do so.  See Greenville v. State, 798 S.W.2d 361, 362-63 (Tex.App.--Beaumont 1990, no pet.).  In this case, Murphy attempts to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court via the Federal Administrative Procedure Act. 5 U.S.C. ' 706 (West 1996)(providing for the scope of review of agency decisions by the federal courts).  The attempt is made in vain.  It is axiomatic that this Court lacks the authority to entertain Murphy=s petition because it cannot review decisions of the federal courts.  Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 4.03 (Vernon Supp. 2002)(delineating intermediate appellate court jurisdiction); see Ex parte Killam, 162 S.W.2d 426, 428 (Tex.Crim.App. 1942)(opin. on rehearing)(invocation of federal jurisdiction not within province of state courts).

For all this reason, we dismiss Murphy=s petition for writ of mandamus for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

July 25, 2002

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW,  Justice

Before Panel No. 2

Barajas, C.J., McClure, and Chew, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)

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

Related

Greenville v. State
798 S.W.2d 361 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Ex parte Killam
162 S.W.2d 426 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Eric Murphy v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-eric-murphy-v-state-texapp-2002.