In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-14-00378-CV ____________________

IN RE DAVID EARL STANLEY

_______________________________________________________ ______________ Original Proceeding ________________________________________________________ _____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION David Earl Stanley filed an original petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the Judge of the 258th District Court to rule on motions that Stanley filed in a forfeiture proceeding. Stanley states that he filed the motions pro se while represented by counsel. “[A] trial court is under no mandatory duty to accept or consider pleadings filed pro se by a party who is represented by counsel.” In re Sondley, 990 S.W.2d 361, 362 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, orig. proceeding); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 7. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on September 24, 2014 Opinion Delivered September 25, 2014 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.