COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
ORDER ON MOTION
Cause number: 01-13-00894-CR; 01-13-00895-CR
Style: Julio Alvarado
v The State of Texas
*
Date motion filed : August 28, 2014
Type of motion: Motion for Discovery
Party filing motion: Pro se
Document to be filed:
If motion to extend time:
Deadline to file document:
Number of previous extensions granted:
Length of extension sought:
Ordered that motion is:
Granted
If document is to be filed, document due:
The Clerk is instructed to file the document as of the date of this order
Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend
time
Denied
Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)
Appellant, acting pro se, filed motions entitled “Discovery Motion—‘Brady’ Inconsistent Evidence”
in both of these appeals. The motions are dismissed because appellant is represented by counsel and
has no right to hybrid representation. See Scheanette v. State, 144 S.W.3d 503, 505 n.2 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2004); Ex Parte Taylor, 36 S.W.3d 883, 887 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).
Judge's signature: /s/ Michael Massengale
Acting individually Acting for the Court
Panel consists of ______________________________.
Date: September 2, 2014
November 7, 2008 Revision