in Re Jamie Lee Bledsoe
This text of in Re Jamie Lee Bledsoe (in Re Jamie Lee Bledsoe) 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.
Opinion
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-19-00117-CR
IN RE JAMIE LEE BLEDSOE
Original Mandamus Proceeding
Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jamie Lee Bledsoe, proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, asking
this Court to find that the Honorable Brad Morin, Respondent, failed to follow the procedures for
amending an indictment set forth in Articles 28.10 and 28.11 of the Texas Code of Criminal
Procedure and that Respondent’s failure resulted in the imposition of an illegal sentence on
Bledsoe and his subsequent unlawful restraint. We will deny his petition because an application
for writ of habeas corpus “is the exclusive post-conviction judicial remedy available when the
conviction is final and the applicant is confined by virtue of his or her felony conviction.” In re
Harrison, 187 S.W.3d 199 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, orig. proceeding) (citing Ex parte
Adams, 768 S.W.2d 281, 287 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (orig. proceeding); McBride v. State, 114
S.W.3d 556, 557 (Tex. App.—Austin 2002, no pet.)).
We have previously affirmed Bledsoe’s judgment of conviction for burglary of a building,
and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused discretionary review of our decision on July 25,
2018. Bledsoe v. State, No. 06-17-00174-CR, 2018 WL 2107249, at *1, *5 (Tex. App.—
Texarkana May 8, 2018, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Therefore,
Bledsoe’s felony conviction has become final. See Beal v. State, 91 S.W.3d 794, 796 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2002).
In Texas, a collateral attack on a felony conviction may only be made through an
application for writ of habeas corpus. Harrison, 187 S.W.3d at 199. The purpose of the writ of
habeas corpus is to determine the lawfulness of confinement. Ex parte Adams, 768 S.W.2d 281,
287 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (orig. proceeding). This is the determination Bledsoe seeks from this 2 Court. Therefore, Bledsoe must follow the procedure for a felony post-conviction application for
writ of habeas corpus set forth in Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. TEX.
CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07; see Harrison, 187 S.W.3d at 199. Since a writ of habeas
corpus is Bledsoe’s exclusive remedy to bring this collateral attack, he is not entitled to a writ of
mandamus. See Harrison, 187 S.W.3d at 199.
For the reasons stated, we deny Bledsoe’s petition for writ of mandamus.
Josh R. Morriss III Chief Justice
Date Submitted: June 20, 2019 Date Decided: June 21, 2019
Do Not Publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Jamie Lee Bledsoe, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jamie-lee-bledsoe-texapp-2019.