Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 12-27-2020
Case Style:
In re James Myart
Case Number: 04-20-00593-CR
Judge: PER CURIAM
Sitting: Luz Elena Chapa, Justice
Beth Watkins, Justice
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
Court: Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
Plaintiff's Attorney: Joe D. Gonzales
Defendant's Attorney:
OR
Just Call 855-853-4800 for Free Help Finding a Lawyer Help You.
Description:
San Antonio, Texas - Criminal Lawyer petition for a writ of mandamus.
Relator James Myart filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus in which he asks this
court to order the trial court to set a bond or release relator pending a hearing on the State’s motion
to adjudicate guilt. Myart is represented by counsel in the trial court; therefore, he is not entitled
to hybrid representation. Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). The
absence of a right to hybrid representation means relator’s pro se mandamus petition will be treated
as presenting nothing for this court’s review. See id.; see also Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806,
806 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding).
Outcome: Accordingly, relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: