in Re Eric Randall Hinkle

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00327-CV

IN RE ERIC RANDALL HINKLE RELATOR

------------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ------------

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that the petition should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (holding that the court of criminal appeals is the “only court with jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proceedings”); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (“[W]hile the courts of appeals have mandamus jurisdiction in criminal matters, only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proceedings.”). Accordingly, relator’s petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED: August 13, 2012