Larry DeWitt Jackson, Jr. v. The State of Texas

Summary

This is a dissenting opinion by Judge Finley of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Larry DeWitt Jackson, Jr. v. The State of Texas. The dissent argues that trial counsel’s complete failure to participate during the punishment phase constituted constructive denial of counsel under United States v. Cronic and Cannon v. State, requiring a presumption of prejudice. The dissent would reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and remand for a new punishment trial.

Holdings

1. The dissent would hold that counsel's conduct during the punishment phase constituted a constructive denial of the effective assistance of counsel because counsel entirely failed to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing, abandoned the role of advocate, and caused the proceeding to lose its character as a confrontation between adversaries.
2. The dissent would hold that prejudice was legally presumed because counsel's performance fell within Cronic's constructive-denial category.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defense counsel's near-total refusal to participate in the punishment phase of trial constituted a constructive denial of the effective assistance of counsel under United States v. Cronic.
2. Whether prejudice should be presumed when counsel entirely fails to subject the prosecution's punishment-phase case to meaningful adversarial testing.

Disposition

other