In Re: Allen Rene Moore v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 10, 2024
Docket12-23-00322-CR
StatusPublished

This text of In Re: Allen Rene Moore v. the State of Texas (In Re: Allen Rene Moore v. the State of Texas) 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
In Re: Allen Rene Moore v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

NO. 12-23-00322-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: §

ALLEN RENE MOORE, § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR §

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Allen Rene Moore, acting pro se, filed this original proceeding to complain of Respondent’s failure to rule on his application for writ of habeas corpus. 1

Relator is represented by counsel. A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation. Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Relator must look to appointed counsel for representation in this original proceeding. See In re Bice, No. 12-12-00038-CR, 2012 WL 2033131, at *1 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 6, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). The absence of a right to hybrid representation means Relator’s pro se petition for writ of mandamus presents nothing for this Court to review. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); see also In re Clark, Nos. 12-20-00208&209-CR, 2020 WL 5552617 (Tex. App.—Tyler Sept. 16, 2020, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (denying mandamus petition because relator was represented by counsel and not entitled to hybrid representation); In re Searcy, No. 14-20-00481-CR, 2020 WL 4012007, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]

1 Respondent is the Honorable Kerry L. Russell, Judge of the 7th District Court in Smith County, Texas. The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest. July 16, 2020, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (per curiam); Bice, 2012 WL 2033131, at *1. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 2

Opinion delivered January 10, 2024. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

2 Additionally, Relator’s petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52.3(a), (e)-(f), (h), and (k), and 52.7. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3 (form and contents of petition); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (record).

2 COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

JANUARY 10, 2024

NO. 12-23-00322-CR

ALLEN RENE MOORE, Relator V.

HON. JUDGE KERRY L. RUSSELL, Respondent

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Allen Rene Moore; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-23-00322-CR and the defendant in trial court cause number 007-1360-23, pending on the docket of the 7th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed herein on December 20, 2023, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the writ should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denied. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.

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

Related

Patrick v. State
906 S.W.2d 481 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Robinson v. State
240 S.W.3d 919 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re: Allen Rene Moore v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-allen-rene-moore-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.