Full Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-26-00941-CV In re John Tracy Josey ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM BELL COUNTY MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator John Tracy Josey, an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining of a 2003 criminal conviction for felony possession of a controlled substance. Relator’s requested relief and bases for the same are not entirely clear. 1 However, the effect of Relator’s requested relief would be to set aside his 2003 controlled substance possession conviction. Relator attempted to appeal the conviction in a direct appeal. Josey v. State, No. 03-03-00652-CR, 2003 WL 22860759, *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 4, 2003, no pet.). However, we dismissed the appeal because Relator accepted a plea bargain where he waived his right to an appeal. Id. The same should occur here. 1 Even though Relator is proceeding pro se, it is still his burden “to properly request and show entitlement to mandamus relief.” In re Danny L. Berymon, No. 13-26-00711-CR, 2026 WL 3035999, *2 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Oct. 9, 2026, orig. proceeding). Among these requirements is that a relator’s mandamus petition “must include a statement of facts and a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the appendix or record.” Id. (citing Tex. R. App. P. 52.3) (emphasis added). Relator has failed to meet this burden. In this proceeding, although the petition is styled as a writ of mandamus, the relief that Relator seeks amounts to relief that would only be available through a writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07; In re Bradley, No. 03-12-00483-CV, 2012 WL 3600860, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 15, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (explaining that relator’s requested relief to have felony conviction set aside amounted to “relief that is available through a writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07”). “The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas relief in felony cases.” See In re Ramirez, No. 03-26-00396-CV, 2026 WL 1250429, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin May 7, 2026, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (citing In re Bradley, 2012 WL 3600860, at *1). Accordingly, we do not have jurisdiction and dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction. __________________________________________ Gisela D. Triana, Justice Before Justices Triana, Crump, and Ellis Filed: October 15, 2026 2