Opinion
01-23-00650-CR
07-09-2024
Ansel Pennygraph v. The State of Texas
180th District Court of Harris County Trial court case No: 1817185
ORDER
April Farris, Judge
On August 25, 2023, appellant Ansel Pennygraph, through his court-appointed trial counsel, filed a notice of appeal from his conviction in trial court case number 1817185. In appellant's notice of appeal, his court-appointed trial counsel moved to withdraw from his representation of appellant. Appellant's notice of appeal also included a representation of appeal that "he is presently indigent and asks the [trial] court to immediately appoint appellate counsel to represent him.
The appellate record reflects that the trial court granted the motion to withdraw, and on September 6, 2023 appointed Stephen Andrew Aslett as appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel. On March 21, 2024, appellant's court-appointed counsel filed an appellant's brief. On June 10, 2024, appellant, acting pro se, filed a "Request to Abate [and] Set Aside Appellant's Brief." In his filing, appellant contended that his court-appointed appellate counsel "is not acting in the best interest of" appellant, and that he has filed a request for substitute counsel in the trial court. However, there is nothing in the Court's records to establish that Mr. Aslett has been permitted to withdraw as appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel, nor that substitute counsel has been appointed to represent appellant on appeal.
Pursuant to Texas law, criminal defendants are not entitled to hybrid representation, and appellant's motion therefore present nothing for this Court to review. See Ex parte Bohannan, 350 S.W.3d 116, 116 n.1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (where appellant was represented by counsel, court must disregard and take no action on pro se filings); Ex parte Hallcy, No. 07-16-00471-CR, 2016 WL 7634497, at *1 (Tex. App.-Amarillo Dec. 30, 2016, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (appellate court lacks jurisdiction over original habeas application filed pro se where applicant was represented by counsel).
Accordingly, we deny appellant's pro se "Request to Abate [and] Set Aside Appellant's Brief."
Additionally, on June 28, 2024, appellant filed a pro se "Appellant's Brief." On July 1, 2024, the State filed a "Motion to Strike Appellant's Pro Se Brief." In its motion, the State noted that appellant "is not entitled to file a pro se . . brief in this case . . . because he is not entitled to hybrid representation on appeal."
We grant the State's motion to strike and direct the Clerk of this Court to strike appellant's June 28, 2024 pro se appellant's brief from the Court's records.
It is so ORDERED.