in Re Patrick Keith Schuh

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 28, 2009
Docket04-08-00917-CR
StatusPublished

This text of in Re Patrick Keith Schuh (in Re Patrick Keith Schuh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
in Re Patrick Keith Schuh, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00917-CR

IN RE Patrick Keith SCHUH

Original Mandamus Proceedings 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 28, 2009

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On December 18, 2008, relator Patrick Keith Schuh filed a petition for writ of mandamus

complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on various motions. Mr. Jesus David Garza has

been appointed to represent relator in the trial court. We conclude that relator’s appointed

counsel is also his counsel for an original proceeding on the issues presented.

To obtain mandamus relief in a criminal matter, the relator must establish: (1) the act

sought to be compelled is ministerial rather than discretionary in nature, and (2) there is no

adequate remedy at law. Deleon v. District Clerk, 187 S.W.3d 473, 474 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

Respondent has no ministerial duty to rule on relator’s pro se motion because relator is

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2008-CR-7669, styled State of Texas v. Patrick Keith Schuh, pending in the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Juanita A. Vasquez-Gardner presiding. 04-08-00917-CR

represented by appointed counsel and is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Robinson v.

State, 240S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1995). Consequently, the respondent did not violate a ministerial duty by declining

to rule on relator’s motion. Therefore, this court has determined that relator is not entitled to the

relief sought, and the petition is DENIED. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Patrick v. State
906 S.W.2d 481 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Deleon v. District Clerk
187 S.W.3d 473 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re Patrick Keith Schuh, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-patrick-keith-schuh-texapp-2009.