In re William Charles Webb Appeal from ... of ... County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-20-00117-CR IN RE WILLIAM CHARLES WEBB Original Proceeding MEMORANDUM OPINION William Charles Webb has filed a petition for writ of mandamus in which he argues that his sentence is illegal and seeks an order requiring the trial court correct it. The Court of Criminal Appeals and this Court have recognized that “the exclusive post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas courts is through a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to [Code of Criminal Procedure article] 11.07.” Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 525 n.8 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); see TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07; Ex parte Mendenhall, 209 S.W.3d 260, 261 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.). Moreover, only the Court of Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas corpus in felony cases. See Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (orig. proceeding); Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding). We are therefore without jurisdiction to consider Webb’s petition for writ of mandamus. Accordingly, Webb’s petition is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. REX D. DAVIS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed April 8, 2020 [OT06] In re Webb Page 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.
