From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Aitch

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Dec 4, 2003
No. 01-03-01185-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 4, 2003)

Opinion

No. 01-03-01185-CR

Opinion issued December 4, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

Panel consists of Justices TAFT, NUCHIA, and KEYES.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Relator, Alton Charles Aitch, has filed a motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus and a petition for writ of mandamus. The motion for leave to file the petition is granted. We next consider relator's complaint that respondent has not ruled on four pro se motions that he filed in the trial court in cause number 936063. A writ of mandamus will issue to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the violation of a duty imposed by law when there is no adequate remedy at law. Canadian Helicopters Ltd. v. Wittig, 876 S.W.2d 304, 305 (Tex. 1994) (orig. proceeding). Appellant is represented by court-appointed counsel in cause number 936063, and has no right to hybrid representation. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995); Custard v. State, 812 S.W.2d 82, 84 n. 1 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1991, pet. ref'd). Therefore, the trial court has no legal duty to rule on the pro se motions. Regarding appellant's pro se motion to dismiss his court-appointed counsel, a trial court has no duty to search for counsel agreeable to an indigent defendant. Buntion v. Harmon, 827 S.W.2d 945, 949 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992); Solis v. State, 792 S.W.2d 95, 100 (Tex.Crim.App. 1990). If relator is contending that his appointed counsel is rendering ineffective assistance, trial counsel's performance is a matter that may be addressed on direct appeal if adequately supported by the record. See Bone v. State, 77 S.W.3d 828 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002). Therefore, because relator has an adequate remedy by appeal if his trial counsel's representation is ineffective, and because a trial court is well within the proper exercise of its discretion in denying a request for the appointment of other counsel, mandamus is not an available remedy. See Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding). The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. It is so ORDERED.

Respondent is the Honorable Denise Collins, Judge, 208th District Court, Harris County.


Summaries of

In re Aitch

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Dec 4, 2003
No. 01-03-01185-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 4, 2003)
Case details for

In re Aitch

Case Details

Full title:IN RE ALTON CHARLES AITCH, Relator

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston

Date published: Dec 4, 2003

Citations

No. 01-03-01185-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 4, 2003)

Citing Cases

In re Abram

"If relator is contending that his appointed counsel is rendering ineffective assistance, trial counsel's…

In re Watson

Therefore, the trial court has no legal duty to rule on the pro se motions. In re Aitch, No. 01-03-01185-CR,…