DocketNumber： 08-03-00525-CR
Filed Date： 2/12/2004
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 9/9/2015
COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
|
IN RE: LEO M. LOZANO, Relator. |
' ' ' ' ' |
No. 08-03-00525-CR AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS |
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Leo M. Lozano has filed a petition for writ of mandamus to compel the trial court and prison officials to correct the amount of good-time credits on his record. We have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus directed to prison officials. See Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. ' 22.221(a), (b) (Vernon Supp. 2004).
Lozano states that he filed a motion for a nunc pro tunc order with the trial court. Based on the documentation he has provided to this Court, it appears that his complaint centers on the calculation of credits based on his classification. The decision to grant good-time credits based on an inmate=s classification is within the discretion of prison officials. See Ex parte Palomo, 759 S.W.2d 671, 674 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). To the extent Lozano=s complaint falls within this rule, the trial court had no authority to interfere with the prison officials= decisions. Some issues related to good-time credits may be reviewed by a writ of habeas corpus. See id. at 672. To the extent Lozano=s complaint is of this nature, we have no authority over matters related to post-conviction writs of habeas corpus. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding).
The petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
SUSAN LARSEN, Justice
February 12, 2004
Before Panel No. 3
Barajas, C.J., Larsen, and Chew, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)