In re Mauricio Balderas Appeal from 290th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00672-CR IN RE Mauricio BALDERAS Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 1, 2014 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On September 24, 2014, relator Mauricio Balderas filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus raising issues related to his underlying felony conviction. In November 2012, relator was convicted of indecency with a child with contact, a second degree felony, and sentenced to fifteen years confinement. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.11 (West 2011). On March 27, 2013, this court dismissed relator s direct appeal from the judgment of conviction in Cause No. 04-1200793-CR, styled Balderas v. State, because the trial court s certification reflected that the defendant had no right of appeal given his written plea bargain agreement. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 2 Therefore, relator s felony conviction became final. 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2011CR0555, styled The State of Texas v. Mauricio Balderas, pending in the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Melisa Skinner presiding. 2 See Balderas v. State, No. 04-12-00793-CR, 2013 WL 1225872, at *1 (Tex. App. San Antonio Mar. 27, 2013, no pet.). 04-14-00672-CR Only the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction over matters related to postconviction relief from an otherwise final felony conviction. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); see also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2014); Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (holding Article 11.07 provides the exclusive means to challenge a final felony conviction. ). Because the relief sought in relator s petition relates to post-conviction relief from an otherwise final felony conviction, we are without jurisdiction to consider his petition for writ of mandamus. Accordingly, relator s petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.