Bentley, Patrick Allen v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 14, 2012·No. 05-11-01441-CR·Published

Opinion

Order issued December )~, 2012

In The-

NO. 05-11-01441-CR

PATRICK ALLEN BENTLEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

ORDER Appellant has filed a pro se supplemental brief and moves for leave to file the

supplemental brief, to dismiss counsel, and to appoint new counsel. Appellant is represented by

counsel who [’fled a brief on the merits and is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Ruddv.

State, 616 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1981); see also TEX. CODE CRIM.

PROC. ANN. art. 26.04(j)(2) (West Supp. 2012). Additionally, while this Court may vant a

motion to withdraw filed by an attorney, see TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5, it does not have authority to

appoint substitute counsel. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.051(d). The Court DENIES

appellant’s motions.

PRESIDING JUSTICE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bentley, Patrick Allen v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Bentley, Patrick Allen v. State (Bentley, Patrick Allen v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rudd v. State
616 S.W.2d 623 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1981)