in Re Fred Martinez

NUMBER 13-18-00455-CR COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

IN RE FRED G. MARTINEZ ____________________________________________________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Contreras, Longoria, and Hinojosa

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria 1 Relator Fred G. Martinez, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on August 20, 2018. 2 Through this original proceeding, relator seeks to compel the trial court to set aside relator’s conviction and order a new trial. Relator contends that his appointed counsel had a disqualifying conflict of interest in representing him in the case below. Relator has further filed a motion for new trial in this original proceeding.

The substance of the relief sought by relator in his petition is habeas corpus relief. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction to grant relief in a post- conviction habeas corpus proceeding where there is a final felony conviction. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West, Westlaw through 2017 1st C.S.); Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (per curiam); Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); In re Watson, 253 S.W.3d 319, 320 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008, orig. proceeding).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the applicable law, concludes that we lack jurisdiction over this matter. Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and motion for new trial for lack of jurisdiction.

NORA L. LONGORIA Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 21st day of August, 2018.