Gray v. Shipley

Court of Appeals of Texas

Gray v. Shipley

877 S.W.2d 806, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 910, 1994 WL 170245

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 21, 1994

Docket01-94-00304-CV

StatusPublished

Cited by147 cases

This text of 877 S.W.2d 806 (Gray v. Shipley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 910, 1994 WL 170245 (Tex. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Relator, Larry L. Gray, has filed a pro se motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus. He is charged by indictment with possession of a controlled substance.

Relator seeks the writ of mandamus so that “the validity of a warrantless arrest with no probable cause justifying arrest be ruled upon to determine if further prosecution of relator may be continued.” Relator is represented by appointed counsel in the trial court. Relator is not entitled to hybrid representation. Rudd v. State, 616 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex.Crim.App.1981).

Accordingly, we overrule relator’s motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus.

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