Opinion
NO. 14-17-01007-CR
01-23-2018
IN RE BRENT JUSTICE, Relator
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS
176th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1385768
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On December 28, 2017, relator Brent Justice filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2017); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Nikita Harmon, presiding judge of the 176th District Court of Harris County, and Chris Daniel, Harris County District Clerk, to hold a resentencing hearing pursuant to this court's decision in relator's appeal of his conviction for cruelty to a nonlivestock animal. See Justice v. State, 532 S.W.3d 862 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2017, no pet.). We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction in part and deny in part.
Dismissal of Request for Mandamus Relief Against District Clerk
We dismiss relator's petition for writ of mandamus for lack of jurisdiction as to relator's complaint against Harris County District Clerk Chris Daniel that he has not held a resentencing hearing. This court's mandamus jurisdiction is governed by section 22.221 of the Texas Government Code. A court of appeals may issue writs of mandamus against (1) a judge of a district, statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court in the court of appeals district; (2) a judge of a district court who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry under Chapter 52 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure in the court of appeals district; or (3) an associate judge of a district or county court appointed by a judge under Chapter 201 of the Texas Family Code in the court of appeals district for the judge who appointed the associate judge. Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221(b). The courts of appeals also may issue all writs necessary to enforce the court of appeals' jurisdiction. Id. § 22.221(a).
The Harris County District Clerk is not one of the parties specified in section 22.221(b). Moreover, relator has not shown that the issuance of a writ compelling the requested relief against the Harris County District Clerk is necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See id. 22.221(a). Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against the Harris County District Clerk.
Denial of Request for Mandamus Relief Against Judge Harmon
On October 19, 2017, this court reversed the judgment in relator's appeal and remanded for a new punishment hearing and sentence. This court issued the mandate on December 15, 2017. Relator was represented by counsel on appeal. Taking judicial notice of our record in relator's appeal, the record shows that relator's counsel continues to represent him. See Tello v. Bank One, N.A., 218 S.W.3d 109, 113 n.4 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, no pet.).
A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation. Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 222 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). Thus, relator has presented nothing for this court's consideration and has not shown that he is entitled to mandamus relief. We deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus as to his complaint that Judge Harmon has failed to hold a hearing for resentencing.
Conclusion
We dismiss the petition for mandamus relief against the Harris County District Clerk for lack of jurisdiction and we deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus as to Judge Harmon.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Busby and Wise.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).