Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed August 27, 2010.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

In Re Joseph J. meeks, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM  OPINION

            On August 2, 2010, relator, Joseph J. Meeks, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court.  See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52.  In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the presiding judge of the 10th District Court of Galveston County to set for a hearing his pro se motion to quash affidavit for probable cause of arrest and complaint. 

            According to relator’s petition, he is represented by counsel in the underlying criminal proceeding.  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 issues relator raises in his pro se petition for writ of mandamus relate directly to a criminal proceeding in which he is presented by counsel.  Therefore, in the absence of a right to hybrid representation, relator has presented nothing for this Court’s consideration.  See Patrick, 906 S.W.2d at 498. 

Relator has not established his entitlement to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus.  Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. 

                                                                                    PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Sullivan.

Do Not Publish—Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).