in Re Lionel Hatchett, Relator

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-11-00258-CR

IN RE LIONEL HATCHETT

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 20, 2011

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On April 5, 2011, relator Lionel Hatchett filed a motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus and a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on various pro se motions. No leave is required to file a petition for writ of mandamus, therefore we deny the motion for leave to file as moot. Counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court for which he is currently confined. 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 pro se motions or petitions 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 motions filed in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH