in Re Christopher Eustice

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 9, 2021
• Docket: 14-21-00613-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed November 9, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-21-00613-CR NO. 14-21-00614-CR

IN RE CHRISTOPHER EUSTICE, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 179th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 1716703 & 1716837

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 27, 2021, relator Christopher Eustice filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for emergency stay of bond revocation in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Ana Martinez, presiding judge of the 179th District Court of Harris County, to set aside two orders signed by the trial court on October 22, 2021, revoking the bond of relator in trial court cause numbers 1716703 and 1716837. As set forth in his petition for writ of mandamus, relator is represented by counsel. A defendant in a criminal law matter is not entitled to hybrid representation. Jenkins v. State, 592 S.W.3d 894, 902 n.47 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). In the absence of a right to hybrid representation, relator’s pro se petition for writ of mandamus presents nothing for this court’s review. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); Turner v. State, 805 S.W.2d 423, 425 n.1 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and motion for emergency stay of bond revocation.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Hassan and Poissant. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).