From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Mcintosh

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Aug 29, 2008
No. 04-08-00600-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 29, 2008)

Opinion

No. 04-08-00600-CR

Delivered and Filed: August 29, 2008. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Original Mandamus Proceeding . PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED.

This proceeding arises out of Cause Nos. 220291, 220292, and 220294, styled The State of Texas v. Donald Ray McIntosh, in County Court No. 7, Bexar County, the Honorable Monica Guerrero presiding.

Sitting: CATHERINE STONE, Justice, PHYLIS J. SPEEDLIN, Justice, REBECCA SIMMONS, Justice.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


On August 12, 2008, relator Donald Ray McIntosh filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to rule on his pro se Motion for Speedy Trial, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Release for Delay of Prosecution and Illegal Restraint, and Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Dismiss for Failure to Provide a Constitutional Speedy Trial or to dismiss with prejudice the underlying criminal cases. We conclude trial counsel is also relator's counsel for an original proceeding on the issue presented. Relator is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995). The absence of a right to hybrid representation means relator's pro se petition will be treated as presenting nothing for this court's review. See id.; see also Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806, 806 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, relator's petition is denied. Relator's motion for leave to file the petition for writ of mandamus is denied as moot.


Summaries of

In re Mcintosh

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Aug 29, 2008
No. 04-08-00600-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 29, 2008)
Case details for

In re Mcintosh

Case Details

Full title:IN RE Donald Ray MCINTOSH

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio

Date published: Aug 29, 2008

Citations

No. 04-08-00600-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 29, 2008)

Citing Cases

McIntosh v. State

This court denied the requested relief because McIntosh was represented by counsel and was not entitled to…