In re Robert MartinezAppeal from 186th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00760-CR IN RE Robert MARTINEZ Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: November 13, 2013 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On October 30, 2013, relator Robert Martinez filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus complaining of the trial court s failure to rule on pro se motions for speedy trial pending in his underlying criminal cases. However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceedings 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 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause Nos. 2013CR6698; 2013CR4545; 2013CR4546; 2013CR4547, each styled The State of Texas v. Robert Martinez, pending in the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Maria Teresa Herr presiding. 04-13-00760-CR abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator s pro se motions filed in the pending criminal proceedings. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. 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 PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.