i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-09-00235-CR
IN RE John NAPOLEON
Original Mandamus Proceeding1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Phylis Speedlin, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 20, 2009
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On April 23, 2009, relator John Napoleon filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining
of the trial court’s failure to rule on his pro se motion for speedy trial and other various pro se
motions. However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding
pending in the trial court for which he is currently confined. 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 pro
se motions filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is represented by
… This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009-CR-1882, styled State v. John Napoleon, pending in the
1
227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Philip Kazen presiding.
04-09-00235-CR
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 for speedy trial and other various pro se motions.
Therefore, we conclude that relator has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly,
the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX . R. APP . P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-