Guerra v. State

Full title: Edward Guerra v. The State of Texas

Court: COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

Date published: Jan 11, 2018

Cause number: 01-17-00464-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 11, 2018)

Opinion

Cause number: 01-17-00464-CR

01-11-2018

Edward Guerra v. The State of Texas

Evelyn V. Keyes

ORDER ON MOTION

Type of motion: Plea in Abatement Party filing motion: Pro Se Appellant Edward Guerra Document to be filed: N/A Ordered that motion is:

[ ] Granted

[ ] Denied

[v] Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

[v] Other: __________

On September 22, 2017, appellant's appointed counsel timely filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, which has not been granted pending appellant's January 29, 2018 pro se Anders response deadline. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5; Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Accordingly, appellant's pro se "Plea in Abatement" 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, Kevin P. Keating, is directed to contact the pro se appellant regarding this plea in abatement.

Judge's signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

[v] Acting individually [ ] Acting for the Court Date: January 11, 2018 November 7, 2008 Revision