In re Albert Almaguer--Appeal from 144th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-05-00889-CV

IN RE Albert ALMAGUER

Original Mandamus Proceeding //

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 21, 2005

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

Albert Almaguer has filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus, complaining that the respondent trial court judge has failed to rule on his pre-trial motion for bond reduction, motion to quash the indictment, and petition for release. The court has considered relator s petition for a writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that relief should be denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

A trial court has a legal, nondiscretionary duty to consider and rule on properly filed motions within a reasonable time. In re Ramirez, 994 S.W.2d 682, 683 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). However, the trial court ... is not required to consider pro se pre-trial motions which were filed when the accused was represented by counsel. Hazelwood v. State, 838 S.W.2d 647, 649 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1992, no pet.); see McKinny v. State, 76 S.W.3d 463, 478 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.). And a trial judge abuses his discretion only if the motion has been brought to his attention and he refuses to rule on it within a reasonable time. Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding); In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App. Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding).

The petition for a writ of mandamus reflects that Almaguer is represented by counsel. Almaguer has not provided us with a record that shows the motions and petition were properly filed by his attorney or that the trial judge has been asked to rule and has refused to do so within a reasonable time. Therefore, Almaguer has not shown an abuse of discretion. Barnes, 832 S.W.2d at 426; Chavez, 62 S.W.3d at 228; see Stoner v. Massey, 586 S.W.2d 843, 846 (Tex. 1979). Accordingly, relator s petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

No costs shall be assessed against relator because he is indigent.

The clerk of this court is directed to transmit a copy of this opinion to the attorneys of record, the trial court judge, and the trial court clerk.

PER CURIAM