in Re Erick Lawson

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 18, 2010
• Docket: 14-10-01060-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed November 18, 2010.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-10-01060-CR

ERIK LAWSON, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1243460

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

            On October 29, 2010, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court.  See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.  Relator complains that respondent, the Honorable Shawna Reagin, presiding judge of the 176th District Court of Harris County, has denied his motion for hybrid representation.

To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig.proceeding).

Because there is no absolute right to hybrid representation, a trial court's ruling on such representation is not a ministerial act but discretionary.  See Ganther v. State, 187 S.W.3d 641, 648 (Tex. App. -- Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. ref'd) (citing Montgomery v. State, 810 S.W.2d 372, 391 (Tex.Crim.App.1990)).  Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

                                                                        PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Seymore, Boyce, and Christopher.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).