In re Leslie Ray Foster Appeal from 10th District Court of Galveston County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Opinion filed November 22, 2016. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00928-CR IN RE LESLIE RAY FOSTER, Relator ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 10th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 16-CR-1600 MEMORANDUM OPINION On November 15, 2016, relator Leslie Ray Foster filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Kerry Neves, presiding judge of the 10th District Court of Galveston County to: (1) rule on his pro se “Application for Writ Of Habeas Corpus Seeking Personal Bond Under Article 17.151 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure or a Bond Reduction”, dated September 11, 2016 (the Habeas Application), and (2) grant any other relief deemed just. Relator indicates in his petition that he was arrested for the offense of organized criminal activity and that an attorney has been appointed to represent him. A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation. 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). The absence of a right to hybrid representation means that a relator’s pro se mandamus petition should be treated as presenting nothing for this court’s review. See Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806 (Tex. App.– Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding); In re Bogus, 14-16-00129-CR, 2016 WL 1165807, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Mar. 24, 2016, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (denying pro se petition for writ of mandamus because relator is represented by counsel). Because relator is represented by counsel, his pro se petition presents nothing for review. We therefore deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jamison, and Donovan. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 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.