in Re Roman Sullivan, Relator
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-11-00414-CR
IN RE Roman SULLIVAN
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 6, 2011
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On June 15, 2011, relator Roman Sullivan filed a petition for writ of mandamus,
complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on various pro se petitions and motions. However,
counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial
court 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 Nos. 2009-CR-1619 and 2009-CR-2009, styled State of Texas v. Roman Sullivan, pending in the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron Rangel presiding. 04-11-00414-CR
abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator’s pro se petitions and motions filed in the
criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus 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DO NOT PUBLISH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
in Re Roman Sullivan, Relator (in Re Roman Sullivan, Relator) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.