in Re Ervin Ellison

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 8, 2006
• Docket: 04-06-00092-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-06-00092-CV

IN RE Ervin ELLISON

Original Mandamus Proceeding ⁽¹⁾

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. López , Chief Justice

Sarah B. Duncan , Justice

Rebecca Simmons , Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 8, 2006

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On February 14, 2006, relator filed a petition for a writ of mandamus , complaining of the trial court's failure to allow his pro se pre-trial application for a writ of habeas corpus "to be filed, heard and ruled on." Counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the trial court. We conclude that appointed counsel for relator is also his counsel for an original proceeding on the issues presented. Relator is not entitled to "hybrid" representation. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). The absence of a right to hybrid representation means relator's pro se petition for a writ of mandamus will be treated as presenting nothing for this court's consideration. See id.; see also Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding). Consequently, this court has determined that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Therefore, the petition is DENIED. Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a). Relator is encouraged to refrain from filing furtherpro se petitions regarding his pending criminal proceeding.

1. This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2005-CR-8039 , styled State of Texas v. Ervin Ellison, pending in the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas , the Honorable Mark R. Luitjen presiding.