in Re Ted Lawrence Robertson ( 2009 )

Opinion to issue December 28, 2009

  In The

Court of Appeals

For The  

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-09-00966-CR

____________

IN RE TED LAWRENCE ROBERTSON, Relator  

---

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Relator, Ted Lawrence Robertson, has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus complaining that the trial court judge has not ruled on either his post-conviction motion for new trial or his motion for a new trial hearing in cause number 940376.    We note that on December 20, 2004, this Court affirmed relator’s conviction in trial court cause number 940376. See Robertson v. State, 175 S.W.3d 359 (Tex. App.—Houston {1st Dist.] 2004, pet. ref’d). Our mandate issued on August 25, 2005.

          In his petition, relator requests that we order the trial court to rule on his post-conviction motions or, in the alternative, order the court to grant him a new trial because his sentence is void. Relator is seeking post-conviction relief in a final felony case.

           The exclusive post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas courts is through a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even if we were to construe relator’s motion for new trial as a motion for out- of-time appeal, neither the trial court nor this Court has authority to grant an out-of-time appeal. Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243

 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2009).

          Therefore, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

          Any pending motions are denied as moot.PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Alcala and Hanks.

Do not publish.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