in Re Eloy Lopez, Jr.

i i i i i i MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-09-00699-CR IN RE Eloy LOPEZ, Jr. Original Mandamus Proceeding1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Delivered and Filed: November 11, 2009 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On October 29, 2009, relator Eloy Lopez, Jr. filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to compel the trial court to rule on his pro se motion to set aside the indictment. However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court for which he is currently confined.2 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 a pro … This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009-CR-9913, styled State of Texas v. Eloy Lopez in the 187th 1 Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Raymond Angelini presiding. … Attorney George Preece was appointed on September 3, 2009 to represent relator in the criminal 2 proceeding pending in the trial court. 04-09-00699-CR se motion 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 that relates directly to his confinement based on the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX . R. APP . P. 52.8(a). PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-