in Re Raul Adam Trevino

Opinion

Opinion issued February 14, 2013.

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-13-00119-CR NO. 01-13-00120-CR ——————————— IN RE RAUL ADAM TREVINO, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Raul Adam Treviño has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, asking

this Court to order the trial court, the Harris County District Clerk, and the Texas

Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) to stop interfering with his efforts to collect evidence to challenge his final felony convictions by petition for writ of

habeas corpus.1

This Court has mandamus jurisdiction against a district court judge or a

county court judge in our district, and we may issue all writs necessary to enforce

our jurisdiction. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221 (West 2004). We have no

authority to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk or the TDCJ except to

protect our jurisdiction. In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.—San

Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). Treviño has not shown that the issuance of a writ

of mandamus is necessary to enforce this Court’s jurisdiction.

Moreover, with respect to the relief requested against the trial court,

Treviño’s petition indicates that the documents he seeks are for use in a post-

conviction proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.

ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2012). We have no authority to issue writs of

mandamus in criminal law matters pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings in

which relief is sought from a final felony judgment. That jurisdiction lies

exclusively with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bd. of Pardons &

Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481,

1 Relator has identified the underlying case as State v. Trevino, Nos. 9425377 and 9425398 in the 209th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Michael T. McSpadden presiding. 2 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717−18 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding).

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Brown.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).