in Re Tyrone Pleasant, Relator
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-11-00251-CR
IN RE Tyrone PLEASANT
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 20, 2011
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On April 1, 2011, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of the trial
court’s failure to rule on his pro se motion for speedy trial. 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 abuse its discretion by
1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2010-CR-0695, styled State of Texas v. Tyrone Pleasant, pending in the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Melissa Skinner presiding. 04-11-00251-CR
declining to rule on relator’s pro se motion 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).
Additionally, relator filed an Application for Leave to File 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 motion 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DO NOT PUBLISH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 Tyrone Pleasant, Relator (in Re Tyrone Pleasant, Relator) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.