Jorge Mendoza, Jr. v. State
This text of Jorge Mendoza, Jr. v. State (Jorge Mendoza, Jr. v. State) 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
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-19-00729-CR
Jorge Mendoza, Jr., Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY NO. 64,862, JUDGE FANCY H. JEZEK, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Jorge Mendoza, Jr. seeks to appeal his 2010 final judgments of
conviction on two felony counts of indecency with a child by sexual contact. See Tex. Penal
Code § 22.011. This Court affirmed those convictions in 2013. Mendoza v. State, 03-10-00344-
CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 6698, at *11 (Tex. App.—Austin May 24, 2013, pet. ref’d)
(mem. op., not designated for publication). Mendoza’s notice of appeal filed October 4, 2019,
states that he is seeking an out-of-time appeal for an “illegal” and “void” conviction.
However, the proper vehicle for seeking an out-of-time appeal is a writ of habeas
corpus from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Portley v. State, 89 S.W.3d 188, 189
(Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, no pet.); see Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07. This Court has no
jurisdiction to grant such habeas-corpus relief from a final felony conviction. See Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483
(Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (“Jurisdiction to grant post conviction habeas corpus relief on a final
felony conviction rests exclusively with this Court.”); Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals,
802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (“We are the only court with jurisdiction in final
post-conviction felony proceedings.”); Ex parte Alexander, 685 S.W.2d 57, 60 (Tex. Crim. App.
1985) (“It is well established that only the Court of Criminal Appeals possesses the authority to
grant relief in a post-conviction habeas corpus proceeding where there is a final felony
conviction.”).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
__________________________________________ Jeff Rose, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Triana and Smith
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: October 17, 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Do Not Publish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
Jorge Mendoza, Jr. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jorge-mendoza-jr-v-state-texapp-2019.