The opinion
Opinion issued September 15, 2016
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-16-00647-CR
———————————
IN RE JULIO FRAN CERVANTES-SEGURA, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Julio Fran Cervantes-Segura, proceeding pro se and incarcerated, has
filed an “Application For Leave to File Original Writ of Mandamus” in this Court.
Relator seeks to compel the respondents, listed as “The State of Texas” or “The
180th Dist. Court,” to re-appoint a public defender as his counsel because his
currently-retained counsel has allegedly provided ineffective assistance, and to hold
a hearing to dismiss his felony indictment because of an alleged failure to bring him
to trial in a timely manner, in his underlying criminal proceeding.1
We construe the application as a petition for writ of mandamus, but deny the
petition.2 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d). We dismiss all pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Brown.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
1
The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Julio Fran Cervantes-Segura, Cause
No. 1445818, pending in the 180th District Court, Harris County, Texas, The
Honorable Catherine Evans presiding.
2
By statute, we have authority to issue a writ of mandamus only against a judge of a
district or county court in our district and as necessary to enforce our appellate
jurisdiction. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 22.221(a), (b) (West Supp. 2015).
Neither the State nor the 180th District Court are a judge of a district or county
court, and relator has failed to state how the writ is necessary to enforce our appellate
jurisdiction. See id. To the extent that relator intended to name the district judge as
respondent, we deny mandamus relief. Because relator admits that he is represented
by counsel below, and a criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation,
his pro se petition presents nothing for this Court’s review. See Robinson v. State,
240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007).
2