in Re Otto Cauley

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-15-00319-CR

____________________

IN RE OTTO CAULEY

_______________________________________________________ ______________

Original Proceeding

1A District Court of Newton County, Texas Trial Cause No. ND-6336

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In his petition for a writ of mandamus, Otto Cauley asks that the Court compel the judge of the 1A District Court of Newton County, Texas to hold a hearing and make findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion for new trial that Cauley says he filed in Trial Court Case Number ND-6336 on May 9, 2015. He identifies a case where his conviction has been affirmed on appeal and the mandate has issued. See generally Cauley v. State, No. 09-11-00034-CR, 2012 WL 1448375, at *4 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Apr. 25, 2012, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not

2

designated for publication). “The trial court’s jurisdiction expires when a case becomes final or is taken to a higher court.” In re State ex rel. Sistrunk, 142 S.W.3d 497, 503 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, orig. proceeding). Because the trial court had no jurisdiction to consider Cauley’s motion for new trial, the trial court did not err by refusing to hold a hearing on it. See In re Pettigrew, 301 S.W.3d 920, 922-23 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2009, orig. proceeding); see also Tex. R. App. P. 21.4(a).

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on August 25, 2015 Opinion Delivered August 26, 2015 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.