In re Deaon Hargrove--Appeal from 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
i i i i i i MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-10-00054-CR IN RE DEAON HARGROVE Original Mandamus Proceeding1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Delivered and Filed: February 3, 2010 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On January 20, 2010, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that his right to a speedy trial has been violated and asking this court to order the trial court to commence his trial in the underlying criminal proceeding. Counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the trial court. We conclude that appointed counsel for relator is also his counsel for an original proceeding on the issues presented. Relator is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). The absence of a right to hybrid representation means relator s pro se petition for writ of mandamus will be treated as presenting nothing for this court s consideration. ¦ This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009-CR-7143, styled The State of Texas v. Deaon Hargrove, pending in the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Sid L. Harle presiding. 1 04-10-00054-CR See id.; see also Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding). Consequently, this court has determined that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Therefore, the petition is DENIED. TEX . R. APP . P. 52.8(a). Relator is encouraged to refrain from filing further pro se petitions regarding his pending criminal proceeding. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.
