In re Deandre Dynell Deboest

Summary

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals of Texas denied Deandre Dynell Deboest’s petition for a writ of mandamus. The court held that Deboest failed to provide a sufficient record showing that relevant motions had been filed and brought to the trial judge’s attention, and further noted that his pro se petition presented nothing for review because he was represented by counsel.

Holdings

1. A relator seeking mandamus to compel a trial court to rule must provide a sufficient record showing that the motion was filed, brought to the respondent judge's attention, and not ruled on within a reasonable time. Deboest failed to make that showing, so he was not entitled to mandamus relief.
2. A criminal defendant represented by counsel is not entitled to hybrid representation; therefore, Deboest's pro se mandamus petition presented nothing for review.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Deboest established entitlement to mandamus relief by showing that a motion to dismiss or set aside the indictment had been filed, brought to the trial judge's attention, and left unresolved for an unreasonable period.
2. Whether Deboest's pro se mandamus petition could be considered while he was represented by counsel in the underlying criminal case.

Disposition

writ_denied