i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-09-00680-CR
IN RE Laurence C. ARMSTEAD
Original Mandamus Proceeding1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Karen Angelini, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 4, 2009
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On October 22, 2009, relator Laurence C. Armstead filed a petition for writ of mandamus,
seeking to compel the trial court to rule on his pro se “Motion to Reduce State Jail Felony to
Misdemeanor.”
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
… This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2007-CR-7441-W , styled State of Texas v. Laurence C. Armstead,
1
in the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Juanita A.Vasquez-Gardner presiding.
2
… Attorney Sharon Thorn was appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial
court.
04-09-00680-CR
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
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DO NOT PUBLISH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-