IN RE: ANTWAIN JAMAR TUTSON (2017)

Court of Appeals of Texas, Amarillo.

IN RE: ANTWAIN JAMAR TUTSON, RELATOR

No. 07-17-00405-CV

Decided: November 07, 2017

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

CONCURRING OPINION

I concur in the Court's judgment and join in its opinion because I read the opinion to construe relator Tutson's pending motions in the trial court to be the equivalent of a pending habeas corpus application under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West 2017). In that circumstance, I agree with the majority that we lack jurisdiction over his petition for mandamus. See Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Tex., Fifth Dist., 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013); In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding).

James T. Campbell Justice

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network