In Re Dennis F. Bernal Jr. v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 18, 2025
• Docket: 09-25-00183-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-25-00183-CR __________________

IN RE DENNIS F. BERNAL JR.

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding Criminal District Court of Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. F16-26106 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In a petition for a writ of mandamus, Dennis F. Bernal Jr. asks this Court to

compel the Judge of the Criminal District Court of Jefferson County to rule on

Bernal’s motion for judgment nunc pro tunc. 1 Bernal complains the trial court will

not recognize any motion or “writ” filed by a person who is represented by counsel

in the Criminal District Court. It appears Bernal is referring to a motion that he filed

while he was still represented by counsel. “There is no constitutional right in Texas

1 Bernal failed to certify that he mailed a copy of his petition to the trial court and the prosecutor. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.5. We use Rule 2, however, to look beyond this deficiency to reach an expeditious result. See id. 2. 1 to hybrid representation partially pro se and partially by counsel.” Landers v. State,

550 S.W.2d 272, 280 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977). Bernal has not shown that the trial

court abused its discretion. We deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. See Tex.

R. App. P. 52.8(a).

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on June 17, 2025 Opinion Delivered June 18, 2025 Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.