Opinion
NO. 03-17-00670-CV
03-02-2018
In re Jeffery D. Tolson
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM WILLIAMSON COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jeffery D. Tolson filed what he styled an "Application for Writ of Error and Application for Writ of Error, Denial of Counsel." In his filing and in the accompanying documents, Tolson challenges his felony conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child rendered in 2009 by arguing that the State impeded his trial attorney's ability to render effective assistance of counsel, that the district court denied his due-process rights and prevented his trial attorney from providing effective assistance of counsel, and that his trial attorney failed to provide effective assistance of counsel at critical stages during the proceedings. In addition, Tolson requests that this Court vacate his conviction or remand for a new trial.
By seeking to challenge his final conviction, Tolson is essentially seeking relief under a writ of habeas corpus. Intermediate appellate courts have no jurisdiction over post-conviction applications for writ of habeas corpus in felony cases. See In re Brown, No. 03-14-00681-CR, 2015 WL 4197134, at *1, n.1 (Tex. App.—Austin July 10, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (providing that post-conviction applications for writ of habeas corpus, for felony cases in which death penalty was not assessed, must be filed in court of original conviction and made returnable to the court of criminal appeals). Only the court of criminal appeals has jurisdiction over those types of matters. See In re Williams, No. 13-14-00412-CR, 2014 WL 3731451, at *1 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi July 22, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 5; see also Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (providing that "[a]rticle 11.07 provides the exclusive means to challenge a final felony conviction" and that "[j]urisdiction to grant post conviction habeas corpus relief on a final felony conviction rests exclusively with [the Court of Criminal Appeals]"). Moreover, intermediate courts are not authorized to consider an original, post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus. See Tex. Gov't Code § 22.221 (setting out writ power for intermediate courts of appeals).
For all of these reasons, we must conclude that we do not have jurisdiction over what is in effect a post-conviction habeas proceeding and, therefore, dismiss Tolson's writ application.
/s/_________
David Puryear, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Bourland Filed: March 2, 2018