Opinion
No. 14-10-00500-CR
Opinion filed June 15, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH. — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Original Proceeding Writ of Mandamus.
Panel consists of Chief Justice HEDGES and Justices YATES and BOYCE.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On June 4, 2010, relator, Charles L. Grable, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Mary Lou Keel, presiding judge of the 232nd District Court of Harris County, to allow discovery related to his pursuit of post-conviction habeas corpus relief under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2009).
Although courts of appeals have jurisdiction in criminal matters, only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction over matters related to final post-conviction felony proceedings. Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding). "[C]ourts of appeals have no authority to issue writs of mandamus in criminal law matters pertaining to [post-conviction habeas] proceedings." In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). Therefore, this court does not have jurisdiction to compel the trial court to allow discovery in the underlying Article 11.07 proceeding.
Accordingly, relator's petition for writ of mandamus is ordered dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE IN CIVIL CASES
OPINION DECISION: Dismissed