In Re: Joshua Cornell Skinner Appeal from 204th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISSED and Opinion Filed October 28, 2022 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-01132-CV IN RE JOSHUA CORNELL SKINNER, Relator Original Proceeding from the 204th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15-20176 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Partida-Kipness, and Justice Smith Opinion by Chief Justice Burns Before the Court is relator’s October 19, 2022 petition for writ of mandamus. This Court previously affirmed, as modified, relator’s conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of fourteen. See Skinner v. State, No. 05-1700153-CR, 2018 WL 3545023, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 24, 2018, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication). In his petition, relator contends that his sentence is void, his constitutional rights were violated during his trial, his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective, the trial court erred by overruling a motion for directed verdict, the trial court erred by allowing “kidnapping” to be removed from the jury charge, and he is being detained illegally. Relator requests this Court to reverse his conviction and acquit relator. We construe relator’s petition as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See In re Noble, No. 05-11-00975-CV, 2011 WL 3558802, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 15, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (construing motion for leave to file writ of mandamus wherein relator sought to “present his innocence” and to cease “being unlawfully restrained” as a petition for writ of habeas corpus). This Court does not have original jurisdiction to consider petitions seeking habeas relief generated in connection with criminal convictions. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.05; TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d); In re Neal, No. 05-22-01010-CV, 2022 WL 6935531, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 12, 2022, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for want of jurisdiction. /Robert D. Burns, III/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE 221132F.P05 –2–

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.