in Re John Rich ( 2009 )

i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-09-00629-CR
IN RE John RICH
Original Mandamus Proceeding1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 28, 2009
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On October 2, 2009, relator John Rich filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to
compel the trial court to rule on his pro se motion to set aside the indictment.
However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending
in the trial court for which he is currently confined.2 A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid
representation. See Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v.
State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). A trial court has no legal duty to rule on a pro
1
… This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2008-CR-4084, styled State of Texas v. John Rich, in the 144th
Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl presiding.
2
… Attorney Raul Trevino was the appointed attorney representing relator at the time he filed his pro se motion.
On August 14, 2009, the trial court granted Mr. Trevino’s motion to withdraw as counsel. On October, 8, 2009, attorney
Charles Bunk was appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court.
04-09-00629-CR
se motion filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is represented by
counsel. See Robinson, 240 S.W.3d at 922. Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its discretion
by declining to rule on relator’s pro se motion that relates directly to his confinement based on the
criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus
is denied. TEX . R. APP . P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-