From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frederick v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jul 27, 2015
No. 04-14-00246-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 27, 2015)

Opinion

No. 04-14-00246-CR

07-27-2015

Destyn David FREDERICK, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


From the 81st Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas
Trial Court No. 11-09-00041-CRL
Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On July 21, 2015, appellant filed a pro se motion to suspend electronic filing and a pro se reply brief, asserting appointed counsel had abandoned the appeal. Appellate counsel, however, timely filed an appellant's brief in this appeal on April 20, 2015, and the filing of a reply brief is not mandatory under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. In Texas, appellants do not have a right to hybrid representation. Rudd v. State, 616 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981). Therefore, appellant's pro se motion and reply brief are STRICKEN and will not be considered by the court.

It is so ORDERED on the 27th day of July, 2015.

PER CURIAM ATTESTED TO: /s/_________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court


Summaries of

Frederick v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jul 27, 2015
No. 04-14-00246-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 27, 2015)
Case details for

Frederick v. State

Case Details

Full title:Destyn David FREDERICK, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: Jul 27, 2015

Citations

No. 04-14-00246-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 27, 2015)