Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-14-00185-CR
IN RE Otto Ray KIETZMAN
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 2, 2014
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
Relator Otto Ray Kietzman filed this pro se petition for writ of mandamus on March 20,
2014, complaining of the trial court’s failure to conduct a hearing on a pending petition for writ of
habeas corpus. Relator has been appointed trial counsel to represent him in the underlying criminal
proceeding. We conclude that any original proceeding on the issue presented should be presented
by relator’s appointed counsel. Relator is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Patrick v. State,
906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). The absence of a right to hybrid representation
means relator’s pro se mandamus petition will be treated as presenting nothing for this court’s
review. See id.; see also Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806, 806 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.]
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2013W0631, styled The State of Texas v. Otto Ray Kietzman, pending in
the Criminal District Court, Magistrate Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Andrew Carruthers presiding.
04-14-00185-CR
1994, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
Additionally, relator requested leave to file his petition for writ of mandamus. No leave is
required to file a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Therefore, relator’s
request for leave to file is denied as moot.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-