in Re Darren McAfee ( 2008 )

Opinion issued December 4, 2008

  In The

Court of Appeals  

For The  

First District of Texas  

____________

NO. 01-08-00903-CR

____________

IN RE DARREN MCAFEE, Relator

---

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus  

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Relator, Darrren McAfee, has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus complaining that he has not been provided a free transcript of the record, in trial court cause number 83316, to use in preparing a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. Relator also complains that neither the District Clerk nor the trial court has responded to his requests for an indigency hearing. We note that relator appealed his conviction in cause number 833161, and that the appeal was assigned to this Court as appellate number 01-00-00470-CR. We issued an opinion affirming the judgment of the trial court in cause number 833161. McAfee v. State, No. 01-00-00470-CR,     2001 WL 619543, (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.], 2001, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). Our mandate issued on July18, 2002. The conviction in cause number 833161 is final.            This Court has mandamus jurisdiction over a district court judge or county court judge in our district, and all writs necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2008). We have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus to compel a district court judge to rule on matters related to a petition for writ of habeas corpus in which the judgment of conviction is final. In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). Nor do we have authority to issue a writ of mandamus against a district clerk unless such is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). This is because jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas corpus relief in felony cases rests exclusively with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 3 (Vernon Supp. 2008); Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth District, 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995).

          Therefore, the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Taft, Keyes, and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).