Opinion
Cause number: 01-16-00936-CR
08-08-2017
ORDER ON MOTION
Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time to Amend or Supplement Appellant's Brief Party filing motion: Pro Se Appellant Document to be filed: Motion to Amend or Supplement Appellant's Brief Ordered that motion is:
[ ] GrantedJudge's signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley
[ ] Denied
[v] Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)
[v] Other: __________
On July 19, 2017, appellant's appointed counsel timely filed appellant's brief on the merits and has not sought to withdraw from representing appellant. See T EX. R. A PP. P. 6.5. Accordingly, appellant's pro se motion for an extension of time to amend or supplement his brief 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).
[v] Acting individually [ ] Acting for the Court Date: August 8, 2017 November 7, 2008 Revision