in Re: J. M. W., a Juvenile

NO. 12-17-00091-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: § J.M.W., A JUVENILE, § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Relator, J.M.W., has filed a petition for writ of coram nobis. In 2001, J.M.W. was adjudicated delinquent for aggravated robbery, and sentenced to imprisonment for twenty-five years. He is currently incarcerated with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice – Institutional Division. He now seeks a writ of coram nobis to correct errors that he contends appear on the face of the record. “The purpose of the writ of error coram nobis is to bring before the court rendering the judgment matters of fact which, if known at the time the judgment was rendered, would have prevented its rendition.” Ex parte McKenzie, 29 S.W.2d 771, 772 (Tex. Crim. App. 1930). The common-law writ of coram nobis has no application in Texas. Ex parte Massey, 249 S.W.2d 599, 601 (Tex. Crim. App. 1952); In re Johnson, No. 03-16-00277-CV, 2016 WL 1756707, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Apr. 27, 2016, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). For this reason, we dismiss Relator’s petition for want of jurisdiction. Opinion delivered April 5, 2017. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)

COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

APRIL 5, 2017

NO. 12-17-00091-CV

IN RE: J.M.W., A JUVENILE, Relator V.

HON. FLOYD T. GETZ, Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of coram nobis filed by J.M.W., a juvenile; who is the relator in Cause No. 003-0443-00, pending on the docket of the County Court at Law No. 3 of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of coram nobis having been filed herein on April 3, 2017, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that it lacks jurisdiction, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of coram nobis be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.