i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-10-00005-CR
IN RE Jose MEDEROS
Original Mandamus Proceeding1
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Rebecca Simmons, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: March 3, 2010
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On January 5, 2010, relator Jose Mederos filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining
of the trial court’s failure to rule on his pro se motion for a speedy trial.
However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding 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 a pro
se motion filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is represented by
1
… This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009-CR-10755, styled State of Texas v. Jose Mederos, in the 399th
Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Juanita Vasquez-Gardner presiding.
2
… On December 31, 2009, the trial court appointed Virginia M aurer to represent relator in the criminal
proceeding.
04-10-00005-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 filed in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial
court. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX . R. APP . P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-