Opinion issued November 21, 2017

In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-17-00856-CR ——————————— IN RE DAVID CLEO RICHARD, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION David Cleo Richard, acting pro se, has filed a petition seeking madamus relief against the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.1 This court’s mandamus jurisdiction is governed by Section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. Section 22.221 expressly limits the mandamus jurisdiction of the courts of appeals to: (1) writs

The underlying case is The State of Texas v. David Richard, cause number 473584 in the 232nd District Court of Harris County. against a district court judge or a county court judge in the court of appeals’ district; and (2) all writs necessary to enforce the court of appeals’ jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221. The Board of Pardons and Paroles is not a district court or county court judge in this court’s district, and Richard has not shown that the issuance of a writ compelling the requested relief is necessary to enforce this court’s appellate jurisdiction. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against the Board of Pardons and Paroles. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.221; In re Fowler, No. 14–15–00712–CR, 2015 WL 5092623, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 27, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

Accordingly, Richard’s petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Lloyd.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).