Narrative Opinion Summary
Appellant Anthony Peace submitted a pro se Supplemental Brief on July 30, 2012, to raise additional issues in his appeal beyond those addressed by his counsel. However, the court ruled that Peace is not permitted to have hybrid representation on appeal, referencing relevant case law (Ex parte Taylor and Rudd v. State). Consequently, the court issued an order to strike the pro se Supplemental Brief. The decision was made by Justices Moseley, Fillmore, and Myers, with Robert M. Fillmore noted as the presiding justice.
Legal Issues Addressed
Prohibition of Hybrid Representation on Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court ruled that an appellant is not allowed to submit additional issues through self-representation while represented by counsel on appeal, reinforcing the prohibition of hybrid representation.
Reasoning: However, the court ruled that Peace is not permitted to have hybrid representation on appeal, referencing relevant case law (Ex parte Taylor and Rudd v. State).
Striking of Pro Se Filings During Representation by Counselsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's pro se Supplemental Brief was struck from the record as it was submitted while he was represented by legal counsel, demonstrating the court's enforcement of procedural rules against hybrid representation.
Reasoning: Consequently, the court issued an order to strike the pro se Supplemental Brief.