in Re Juan Jesus Fonseca
Opinion
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-14-00444-CR
IN RE Juan Jesus FONSECA
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 16, 2014
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
Relator Juan Jesus Fonseca filed this pro se petition for writ of mandamus on June 20,
2014, complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on or forward a copy of his motion seeking
habeas corpus relief to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Relator has been appointed trial
counsel to represent him in connection with his pending criminal charges. We conclude that any
original proceeding on the issue addressed in relator’s petition should be presented by relator’s
trial counsel. 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 mandamus petition will be treated as presenting nothing for this court’s review. See id.; see also
1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2013CR9855, styled The State of Texas v. Juan Jesus Fonseca, pending in the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Melisa Skinner presiding. 04-14-00444-CR
Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806, 806 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding).
Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
Additionally, relator filed an application for leave to file his petition for writ of mandamus.
No leave is required to file a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.
Therefore, relator’s request for leave to file is denied as moot.
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
in Re Juan Jesus Fonseca (in Re Juan Jesus Fonseca) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.