in Re William Charles Webb
Opinion
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-20-00117-CR
IN RE WILLIAM CHARLES WEBB
Original Proceeding
MEMORANDUM OPINION
William Charles Webb has filed a petition for writ of mandamus in which he
argues that his sentence is illegal and seeks an order requiring the trial court correct it.
The Court of Criminal Appeals and this Court have recognized that “the exclusive
post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas courts is through a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to [Code of Criminal Procedure article] 11.07.” Olivo v. State, 918
S.W.2d 519, 525 n.8 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); see TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07; Ex
parte Mendenhall, 209 S.W.3d 260, 261 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.). Moreover, only
the Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas corpus in felony cases. See Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist.,
910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (orig. proceeding); Ater v. Eighth Court of
Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding). We are therefore
without jurisdiction to consider Webb’s petition for writ of mandamus.
Accordingly, Webb’s petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
REX D. DAVIS Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed April 8, 2020 [OT06]
In re Webb Page 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
in Re William Charles Webb (in Re William Charles Webb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.