i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-08-00484-CR
IN RE Martin A. CASAREZ
Original Mandamus Proceeding1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice
Catherine Stone, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 23, 2008
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
In this original mandamus proceeding, relator Martin A. Casarez has filed a pro se petition
for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to rule on and grant his pro se request for
a speedy trial in the underlying criminal matter. Counsel has been appointed to represent Casarez
in the trial court cause. To obtain mandamus relief in a criminal matter, the relator must establish
the act sought to be compelled is ministerial rather than discretionary in nature, and there is no other
adequate remedy at law. Dickens v. Second Court of Appeals, 727 S.W.2d 542, 548 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1987). Although a trial court has the discretion to permit hybrid representation, it is not
required to do so. See Scarbrough v. State, 777 S.W.2d 83, 92 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989); Landers v.
State, 550 S.W.2d 272, 280 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977). It is well-established that a defendant in a
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2007-CR-8706, styled The State of Texas v. Martin A. Casarez,
pending in the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Sid L. Harle, presiding.
04-08-00466-CR
criminal matter does not have a right to hybrid representation. Scheanette v. State, 144 S.W.3d 503,
505 n.2 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). Accordingly, the act Casarez seeks to compel is discretionary, not
ministerial, in nature and we therefore deny the pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-