In re John Rich--Appeal from 144th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
i i i i i i MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-09-00627-CR IN RE John RICH Original Mandamus Proceeding1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 28, 2009 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On October 2, 2009, relator John Rich filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to compel the trial court to rule on his pro se motion for discovery. 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 1 ¦ This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2008-CR-4084, styled State of Texas v. John Rich, in the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl presiding. 2 ¦ Attorney Charles Bunk was appointed on October 8, 2009 to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. 04-09-00627-CR se motion 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 abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator s pro se motion that relates directly to his confinement based on 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 PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-
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.
