MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00031-CR IN RE Myles Thomsen HAMMON Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Delivered and Filed: February 8, 2012 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On January 17, 2012, relator Myles Thomsen Hammon filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on various pro se motions. However, 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

This proceeding arises out of Cause No. NM121921, styled State of Texas v. Myles Thomsen Hammon, pending in the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Philip Kazen presiding.

04-12-00031-CR

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PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-