Jfourtlj Court of is>nn gntonio, October 23, 2013

No. 04-13-00669-CR, 04-13-00670-CR, 04-13-00671-CR, 04-13-00672-CR, 04-13-00673-CR, 04-13-00674-CR, 04-13-00675-CR, 04-13-00676-CR, 04-13-00677-CR, 04-13-00678-CR, and 04-13-00679-CR

Matt BERNAL, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012CR9915, 2012CR9914, 2012CR9913, 2013CR9907, 2012CR9908, 2012CR9909, 2012CR9910, 2012CR9911, 2012CR9912, 2012CR9905, and 2012CR9906 Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

ORDER The Court has examined the clerk's records in Nos. 04-13-00669-CR, 04-13-00670-CR, 04-13-00671-CR, 04-13-00672-CR, 04-13-00673-CR, 04-13-00674-CR, 04-13-00675-CR, 04- 13-00676-CR, 04-13-00677-CR, 04-13-00678-CR, and 04-13-00679-CR, and is of the opinion that, in the interest of efficient administration, they should be consolidated. We, therefore, ORDER Nos. 04-13-00669-CR, 04-13-00670-CR, 04-13-00671-CR, 04-13-00672-CR, 04-13- 00673-CR, 04-13-00674-CR, 04-13-00675-CR, 04-13-00676-CR, 04-13-00677-CR, 04-13- 00678-CR, and 04-13-00679-CR consolidated. The parties must file any motions or other pleadings as if the appeal were one, but put all appeal numbers in the style of the case. However, the record in each case will remain separate. The Court will dispose of the appeals with the same judgment, opinion, and mandate.

Furthermore, on October 16, 2013, appellant filed a pro sc motion in these appeals, asking that his convictions be overturned. However, the clerk's record shows that attorney Connie J. Kelly has been appointed to represent appellant in these appeals. In Texas, appellants do not have a right to hybrid representation. Riuld v. State, 616 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1981). Appellant's pro sc motion is therefore DENIED.