In re Justin Emar Moore Appeal from 175th 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. 04-14-00863-CR IN RE Justin Emar MOORE Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 23, 2014 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On December 11, 2014, relator Justin Emar Moore filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court’s denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 11.05, 11.07 (West 2005 & Supp. 2014). In 2012, relator was convicted on multiple counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child by contact, and was sentenced to life imprisonment. On January 9, 2013, this court affirmed the judgment of conviction in Cause No. 04-12-00043-CR. Therefore, relator’s felony conviction became final. 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, 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2010CR4143, styled The State of Texas v. Justin Emar Moore, pending in the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Mary D. Roman presiding. 04-14-00863-CR 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); see also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07; 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 that “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 for writ of mandamus 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 PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.