From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Cantu

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Aug 3, 2011
No. 04-11-00534-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 3, 2011)

Opinion

No. 04-11-00534-CR

08-03-2011

IN RE Eric Anthony CANTU


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Original Mandamus Proceeding

This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2011-CR-2001, styled State of Texas v. Eric Anthony Cantu, in the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Sid L. Harle presiding.

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On July 26, 2011, relator Eric Anthony Cantu filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of the trial court's failure to rule on his pro se "motion to accumulate all previously served incarceration time." However, relator is still represented by appointed counsel in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court for which he is currently confined. A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). A trial court has no legal duty to rule on pro se motions or petitions filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is represented by counsel. See Robinson, 240 S.W.3d at 922. Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator's pro se motion filed in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH


Summaries of

In re Cantu

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Aug 3, 2011
No. 04-11-00534-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 3, 2011)
Case details for

In re Cantu

Case Details

Full title:IN RE Eric Anthony CANTU

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

Date published: Aug 3, 2011

Citations

No. 04-11-00534-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 3, 2011)