in Re Albert Beasley v. State

Opinion

Opinion issued February 9, 2012

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-11-01092-CR

———————————

In re ALBERT beasley, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Relator, Albert Beasley, petitioned for writ of mandamus asking that we compel the trial court to accept post-judgment bills of exceptions.[1]

          We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.[2]Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Sharp.

Do not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

---

[1]           The underlying case is Albert Beasely v. State of Texas, No. 10CR2663 (56th Dist. Ct., Galveston Cnty., Tex.), the Honorable Lonnie Cox, presiding.

[2]           Relator has failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3.In addition, relator is represented by counsel, both at trial and on appeal.See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (holding that appellant has no right to hybrid representation).