In Re: Jason Burrow--Appeal from 241st District Court of Smith County

NO. 12-08-00079-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: JASON BURROW,

RELATOR ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this original mandamus proceeding, Jason Burrow requests an order compelling the trial court to have [Burrow] brought before the Court to answer and plead to the pending charges. He also complains that the trial court has refused to rule on his motions for bench warrants within a reasonable time.1 We deny the petition.

In a criminal case, mandamus relief is authorized only if the relator establishes that (1) he has no other adequate legal remedy and (2) under the facts and the law, the act sought to be compelled is purely ministerial. State ex rel. Hill v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App.2001). In the instant case, Burrow is charged with burglary of a habitation in trial court cause number 241-1364-06. He alleges that he has filed five motions seeking a bench warrant so that he can appear before the trial court and answer the charges, but the trial court has not ruled on the motions.

According to the information available in this appeal, Burrow has counsel to represent him on the pending charge. Burrow is not entitled to hybrid representation partially pro se and partially by counsel. See Landers v. State, 550 S.W.2d 272, 280 (Tex. Crim. App.1977). Because Burrow has counsel, he must look solely to his counsel for representation. Therefore, we do not consider Burrow s pro se mandamus petition. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

SAM GRIFFITH

Justice

Opinion delivered February 22, 2008.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

1 The respondent is the Honorable Jack Skeen, Jr., Judge of the 241st Judicial District Court, Smith County, Texas.