in Re Tommy Recio

Opinion

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-12-00371-CR

IN RE TOMMY RECIO

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Tommy Recio has filed a “motion to file writ of habeas corpus,” which we construe to be an original proceeding seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1. Relator seeks post-conviction habeas corpus relief from a felony conviction in the 3rd District Court of Anderson County,1 which is within the jurisdiction of the Twelfth Court of Appeals. TEX. GOV’T. CODE ANN. § 22.201(m) (West Supp. 2012). Relator also mentions being incarcerated (and discharged) as a result of a criminal proceeding in the 42nd District Court of Hale County, which is within the jurisdiction of the Seventh Court of Appeals. Id. § 22.201(h).

1Relator asserts that he is serving a twenty-five year sentence and pleads for reversal and dismissal of cause no. 28694.

Irrespective of the county of the convicting court, an intermediate court of appeals does not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal law matters, Ex parte Price, 228 S.W.3d 885, 886 (Tex. App.—Waco 2007, orig. proceeding), and particularly does not have jurisdiction of post-conviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases. See Ex parte Martinez, 175 S.W.3d 510, 512-13 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, orig. proceeding) (intermediate court of appeals has no jurisdiction over post-conviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases); TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a) (West Supp. 2012).

Furthermore, the Tenth Court of Appeals does not have territorial jurisdiction of an original proceeding arising out of an Anderson County or Hale County criminal conviction. See TEX. GOV’T. CODE ANN. § 22.201 (h, k, m).

Accordingly, we dismiss Relator’s “motion to file writ of habeas corpus” for lack of jurisdiction.

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed November 1, 2012 Do not publish [OT06]

In re Recio Page 2