IN RE MICHAEL LYNN EVANS, Relator

Annotate this Case

Writ of Mandamus Dismissed, Opinion issued December 20, 2006.
 
 
 
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
............................
No. 05-06-01678-CV
............................
IN RE MICHAEL LYNN EVANS, Relator
.............................................................
Original Proceeding from the 194th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F86-78530-VM
.............................................................
 
MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
Before Justices Whittington, FitzGerald, and Lang-Miers
Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers
 
        Relator seeks mandamus relief to order the trial court to grant his “motion for a nunc pro tunc order to set aside unauthorized judgement of conviction; with records, and proposed order.” We affirmed the judgment in this case on direct appeal. See Evans v. State, No. 05-87-01088-CR (Tex.App.- Dallas May 20, 1988, pet. ref'd)(not designated for publication). In this petition, relator is seeking post-conviction relief to set aside his 1987 murder conviction. Only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction in post-conviction felony proceedings. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon 2005); Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W. 23d 241,243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)(orig. proceeding); In re McFee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). Accordingly, we DISMISS relator's petition for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8.         
 
                                                          
                                                          ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS
061678f.p05                                                  JUSTICE                                                         
 
 
 
 
                                                          
 
                                                          
 
 
 
 
 

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.