Court Opinion

ID: 9902323
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-25 11:11:32.195769+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:49.069933
License: Public Domain

NO. 12-23-00264-CR
                             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
                TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
                                         TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE:                                                 §

WILLIAM WALKER,                                        §       ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR                                                §

                                      MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                          PER CURIAM
        On September 28, 2023, William Walker filed a pro se notice of appeal regarding his
application for writ of habeas corpus seeking a bond reduction. We dismissed the appeal for
want of jurisdiction because there was no final judgment or appealable order. See Ex parte
Walker, No. 12-23-00248-CR, 2023 WL 6885020 (Tex. App.—Tyler Oct. 18, 2023, no pet.) (per
curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). On October 18, Relator filed a pro se
petition for writ of mandamus, in which he requests a writ instructing Respondent to sign a final
judgment or appealable order. 1

        Relator is represented by counsel.           A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid
representation. Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Relator must
look to appointed counsel for representation in this original proceeding. See In re Bice, No. 12-
12-00038-CR, 2012 WL 2033131, at *1 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 6, 2012, orig.
proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication).              The absence of a right to hybrid
representation means Relator’s pro se petition for writ of mandamus presents nothing for this
Court to review. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); see also In
re Clark, Nos. 12-20-00208&209-CR, 2020 WL 5552617 (Tex. App.—Tyler Sept. 16, 2020,

        1
         Respondent is the Honorable Robert K. Inselmann, Judge of the 217th District Court in Angelina County,
Texas. The State of Texas is the Real Party in Interest.
orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (denying mandamus
petition because relator was represented by counsel and not entitled to hybrid representation); In
re Searcy, No. 14-20-00481-CR, 2020 WL 4012007, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]
July 16, 2020, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (per
curiam); Bice, 2012 WL 2033131, at *1. We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. 2

Opinion delivered November 21, 2023.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

                                              (DO NOT PUBLISH)

         2
           Additionally, Relator’s petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52.1, 52.2, 52.3(a)-(f), (h), and (k),
and 52.7. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1 (commencement of original proceeding); Tex. R. App. P. 52.2 (designation of
parties); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3 (form and contents of petition); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7 (record). The Clerk of this Court
notified Relator of the defects and gave a deadline by which to correct them. Although the notice was sent to the
address provided by Relator, it was returned with no forwarding address. Absent a record provided in accordance
with Rule 52.7, we could not determine whether Relator is entitled to relief. See In re McCreary, No. 12-15-00067-
CR, 2015 WL 1395783 (Tex. App.–Tyler Mar. 25, 2015, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated
for publication).

                                                          2
                                 COURT OF APPEALS
     TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
                                         JUDGMENT

                                       NOVEMBER 21, 2023

                                       NO. 12-23-00264-CR

                                      WILLIAM WALKER,
                                           Relator
                                             V.

                      HON. JUDGE ROBERT K. INSELMANN JR.,
                                   Respondent

                                      ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

              ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by
William Walker; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12-23-00264-CR and the
defendant in trial court cause number 2022-0666, pending on the docket of the 217th Judicial
District Court of Angelina County, Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed
herein on October 18, 2023, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion
of this Court that the writ should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and
ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denied.
                  By per curiam opinion.
                  Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.