Edwin Thomas Baty v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Ninth Court of Appeals of Texas considers Edwin Thomas Baty’s appeal from a capital-murder conviction and life sentence. Baty argues that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to extraneous-offense evidence, his invocation of the right to counsel during a recorded interview, and alleged jury-charge errors; he also challenges the legality of the sentence. The court affirms the judgment as modified.

Holdings

1. Baty failed to establish deficient performance because the challenged evidence was admissible or counsel could have had a reasonable trial strategy for not objecting to it.
2. Baty failed to show that counsel's failure to object to the recording of his invocation of the right to counsel and right to terminate questioning constituted ineffective assistance.
3. Baty failed to establish ineffective assistance based on the omitted benefit-of-the-doubt instruction, the omission of 'attempted use' from one self-defense application sentence, or the provocation instruction.
4. The written judgment was required to be reformed to state that Baty was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to evidence of Baty's prior aggravated-sexual-assault conviction, alcohol and marijuana use, and alleged prior abuse of Jorgensen by Jorgensen's father.
2. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the jury's hearing Baty invoke his right to terminate the interview and request counsel.
3. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to alleged errors in the jury charge concerning a benefit-of-the-doubt instruction, the phrase 'attempted use' in the self-defense application paragraph, and provocation.
4. Whether the written judgment imposed an illegal sentence by stating that Baty was eligible for parole despite the capital-murder sentence required by statute.

Disposition

affirmed