                                      In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                               ________________

                              NO. 09-14-00317-CR
                               ________________

                   IN RE AARON CHARLES HILL
__________________________________________________________________

                         Original Proceeding
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Relator Aaron Charles Hill filed a petition for writ of mandamus, in which

he complains that the Clerk of the Ninth Court of Appeals failed to forward a copy

of his post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus to the Court of

Criminal Appeals.1 The Clerk of the Court of Appeals has no role in forwarding

post-conviction habeas petitions to the Court of Criminal Appeals; rather, the clerk

of the convicting court must transmit the application to the Court of Criminal

Appeals. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 3(c) (West Supp. 2013). We

take judicial notice that the District Clerk of Jefferson County is Jane Birge, and

      1
        This Court recently affirmed the trial court’s judgments of conviction. Hill
v. State, Nos. 09-13-00479-CR, 09-13-00480-CR, 2014 WL 3387383 (Tex. App.—
Beaumont July 9, 2014, no pet. h.).
                                         1
we consider this petition as if she had been named as the respondent. See Tex. R.

Evid. 201; Tex. R. App. P. 52.2.

      Other than to protect our jurisdiction, this Court’s mandamus jurisdiction

does not extend to the District Clerk. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West

2004). The proceedings at issue are post-conviction matters that do not implicate

this Court’s jurisdiction. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07, § 3(a).

Mandamus relief in a post-conviction habeas proceeding must be obtained from the

Court of Criminal Appeals. In re McAfee, 53 S.W.3d 715, 718 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we deny the petition for

writ of mandamus.

      PETITION DENIED.

                                                        PER CURIAM


Submitted on August 19, 2014
Opinion Delivered August 20, 2014
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.




                                        2
