MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-11-00125-CR
IN RE Donald Ray MCINTOSH
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: March 16, 2011
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On February 15, 2011, relator Donald Ray McIntosh filed a petition for writ of
mandamus, complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on various pro se motions. However,
counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceedings pending in the trial
court for which he is currently confined. 2 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
1
This proceeding arises out of Cause Nos. 2009-CR-12304, 2010-CR-11389, & CM963806 styled State of Texas v.
Donald Ray McIntosh, pending in the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron
Rangel presiding.
2
Attorney Robert Jimenez was appointed to represent relator.
04-11-00125-CR
abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator’s pro se motions filed in the criminal
proceedings pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
Additionally, relator filed an Application for Leave to File 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 motion for leave to file is DENIED as moot.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-