Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

In habeas proceedings of defendant challenging his enhanced sentence under the habitual-offender statute for his murder conviction, the court's earlier holding on original submission is affirmed and defendant is entitled to a new appeal challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support his thirty-year sentence as defendant's appellate counsel was ineffective because he did not raise a claim that would have resulted in a retrial on punishment with the possibility of a lesser sentence and no possibility of a greater sentence. Here, the possibility of a greater sentence is barred by the presumption of judicial vindictiveness and in order to rebut that presumption, the state must introduce new objective information, from before or after the original punishment hearing, that would justify an increased sentence.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/22/2010
• Published 09/22/2010

Judges

• Johnson

Court

• Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Counsel