Billy Jack Guerra v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided September 14, 2016·No. 04-16-00462-CR·Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 14, 2016

No. 04-16-00462-CR

Billy Jack GUERRA, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016CR1777 Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant has filed a pro se motion to dismiss his appeal. Appellant is represented by counsel. In Texas, appellants do not have a right to hybrid representation. See Ex parte Taylor, 36 S.W.3d 883, 889 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App. App. 2001); Rudd v. State, 616 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981). Therefore, appellant’s motion is DENIED.

_________________________________ Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 14th day of September, 2016.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court

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

Billy Jack Guerra v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Billy Jack Guerra v. State (Billy Jack Guerra v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ex Parte Taylor
36 S.W.3d 883 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2001)
Rudd v. State
616 S.W.2d 623 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1981)