Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-13-00021-CR
IN RE Kyle MILLER
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: January 30, 2013
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On January 10, 2013, Relator Kyle Miller filed a petition for writ of mandamus,
complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on his 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 or petitions 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 Miller’s pro se motions filed in the criminal
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2011-CR-5502, styled State of Texas v. Kyle Miller, pending in the 175th
Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Mary D. Roman presiding.
04-13-00021-CR
proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-