in Re Ricardo Lawson

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00326-CR

IN RE Ricardo LAWSON

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 14, 2014

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On May 5, 2014, relator Ricardo Lawson filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus

complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on his pro se motion for speedy trial pending in the

underlying criminal proceeding. However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the

criminal proceeding for which he is currently confined. A criminal defendant is not entitled to

hybrid representation. See Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick

v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). A trial court has no legal duty to rule on

pro se motions or petitions filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is

represented by counsel. See Robinson, 240 S.W.3d at 922. Consequently, the trial court did not

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2014CR0512, styled The State of Texas v. Ricardo Lawson, pending in the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas. 04-14-00326-CR

abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator’s pro se motion filed in the pending criminal

matter. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

Additionally, relator submitted 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DO NOT PUBLISH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-