From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Seard v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Jun 3, 2024
No. 04-21-00482-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 3, 2024)

Opinion

04-21-00482-CR

06-03-2024

Vincent Jeffrey SEARD, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee


From the 216th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas Trial Court No. A21432 Honorable Albert D. Pattillo, III, Judge Presiding

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice, Irene Rios, Justice, Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

ORDER

Irene Rios, Justice

Appellant Vincent Jeffrey Seard's motion for rehearing is DENIED. See Tex. R. App. P. 41.1, 49.3.

Vincent Jeffery Seard filed a pro se motion for rehearing as well. However, Seard does not have a right to hybrid representation. Scheanette v. State, 144 S.W.3d 503, 505 n.2 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); see also Landers v. State, 550 S.W.2d 272, 280 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977) (defining hybrid representation as "representation partially pro se and partially by counsel"). Nor does he have a constitutional right to represent himself on direct appeal. Scheanette, 144 S.W.3d at 505 n.2. Thus, we do not address Seard's pro se motion for rehearing.


Summaries of

Seard v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Jun 3, 2024
No. 04-21-00482-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 3, 2024)
Case details for

Seard v. State

Case Details

Full title:Vincent Jeffrey SEARD, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

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

Date published: Jun 3, 2024

Citations

No. 04-21-00482-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 3, 2024)