in Re: Ervin Smith, Jr.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 13, 2003
• Docket: 01-03-00026-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued February 13, 2003

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-03-00026-CV

IN RE ERVIN SMITH, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator filed in this Court a petition for writ of mandamus complaining that respondent Charles Bacarisse, Harris County District Clerk, has not filed relator's pro se application for writ of habeas corpus that relator filed in accordance with article 11.07(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. Art. 11.07, § 1 (Vernon Supp. 2003). We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

We have no jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless such is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding); Summit Savings Ass'n v. Garcia, 727 S.W.2d 106, 107 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1987, orig. proceeding). We have no jurisdiction over post-conviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases. See Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth District, 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d at 692; Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 3 (Vernon Supp. 2003). Therefore, because the matter raised in relator's petition does not affect our jurisdiction, we must deny the petition.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hedges, Jennings, and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).