Opinion issued February 9, 2012

In The

Court of Appeals

For the

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-11-01091-CR

____________

IN RE MICHAEL TRIPP JR., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

            In this petition for writ of mandamus, relator, Michael Tripp Jr., seeks to compel the trial court to respond to his motion to suppress evidence and motion for discovery, filed pro se.^[1]

          Although relator filed his petition for writ of mandamus pro se and states that he filed the two motions at issue pro se, his petition also reflects that he is represented by counsel in the trial court.  A criminal defendant has no right to hybrid representation.  Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Thomas v. State, 312 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, pet. ref’d) (“[A] criminal defendant currently represented by counsel is not entitled to hybrid representation.”).  Consequently, “a trial court is free to disregard any pro se motions presented by a defendant who is represented by counsel.”  Robinson, 240 S.W.3d at 922.  Thus, because relator is represented by counsel in the trial court, the trial court was free to disregard relator’s pro se motion to suppress evidence and motion for discovery.  We conclude that the trial court has not abused its discretion by “refus[ing] to adhere and respond [to relator’s motions] by notice of receipt” or by refusing to set a hearing date on relator’s motions.

          Moreover, we note that relator has failed to file in this Court an appendix or record containing his motion to suppress evidence and motion for discovery.  See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k) (stating that appendix to petition for writ of mandamus must include “a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any other document showing the matter complained of”); Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(1) (requiring relator to include, in record filed with petition for writ of mandamus, “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”).

          We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Sharp.

Do Not Publish.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