Ross Allen Hartwell v. State

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ross Allen Hartwell v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 6758
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided September 3, 2015·No. 13-14-00087-CR·Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-14-00087-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

ROSS ALLEN HARTWELL, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 390th District Court of Travis County, Texas.

ORDER

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria Order Per Curiam This cause is before the Court on appellant’s pro se motion to reinstate motion for

rehearing. We denied appellant’s motion for rehearing because it violated the prohibition

against hybrid representation. On August 22, 2015, appellant filed this motion asserting

that he was not represented by counsel at the time he filed his original motion. Because

the status of appellant’s representation is unclear from the record, we GRANT appellant’s motion to reinstate and withdraw our prior disposition of July 30, 2015. After considering

appellant’s motion for rehearing on the merits, it is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 3rd day of September, 2015.

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

Ross Allen Hartwell v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Ross Allen Hartwell v. State (Ross Allen Hartwell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.