Shelby Chase Forshee v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 26, 2017
• Docket: 01-17-00567-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION Cause number: 01-17-00567-CR Style: Shelby Chase Forshee v. The State of Texas Date motion filed*: September 14, 2017 Type of motion: Letter-Request to Re-File Appeal and for Appointment of New Counsel Party filing motion: Pro Se Appellant Shelby Chase Forshee Document to be filed: N/A

Ordered that motion is:  Granted  Denied  Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)  Other: _____________________________________ On August 22, 2017, this Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Judgment granted appellant’s motion to dismiss this appeal which was signed by the pro se appellant. Appellant’s appointed counsel has not sought to withdraw from representing appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5. Accordingly, appellant’s pro se letter-request to re-file appeal and for appointment of new counsel, filed on September 14, 2017, with the district clerk, and included in a supplemental clerk’s record filed on September 19, 2017, is dismissed as moot because he is currently represented by counsel and is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Ex parte Taylor, 36 S.W.3d 883, 887 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (stating “[a]ppellants are not allowed to have hybrid representation” and appellant did not have right to file documents with appellate court while represented by counsel). Appellant’s counsel, Stan Schwieger, is directed to comply with his notification obligations including sending, via certified mail, a copy of this order to the appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley  Acting for the Court

Date: September 26, 2017

November 7, 2008 Revision