Elmer Ray Robinson, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals held that an appeal may be taken from a trial court's actual ruling on a pro se motion filed by a defendant who has counsel: although a defendant has no right to hybrid representation and a trial court may disregard such motions, a ruling the court chooses to make is reviewable. The court declined to adopt either the First Court of Appeals' Busselman rule (which insulated such rulings from review) or the Tenth Court of Appeals' Meyer rule (which inferred hybrid representation from the act of ruling), found the record insufficient to show that appellate counsel adopted the pro se motion for new trial, and remanded to the Court of Appeals to determine whether the trial court's circled 'Denied' notation was a merits ruling or a disposal of the motion. Presiding Judge Keller dissented, arguing the appellant failed his burden to develop a record showing entitlement to relief and the court of appeals should be affirmed; Judge Keasler, joined by Judges Price and Hervey, dissented, arguing the denial was plainly a merits ruling permitting hybrid representation and should be held appealable.