Adrian Francisco Miranda v. State, 14-14-00091-CR

Adrian Francisco Miranda was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child and sentenced to 25 years after waiving a jury for punishment.
Miranda testified in his own defense and denied the allegations; defense counsel on redirect asked whether he had ever been charged with a sex crime and Miranda said no.
The State informed the court the jury could be shown Miranda had been charged as a juvenile with indecency with a child; defense counsel acknowledged the charge had been dismissed but had already asked the misleading question.
Defense counsel then asked Miranda in front of the jury whether his earlier denial was truthful; Miranda said it was not, effectively admitting he had been charged and had lied.
The admission was the last evidence presented to the jury before closing; the court of appeals acknowledged possible deficiency but held Miranda failed to show Strickland prejudice because the evidence was brief.
Miranda moved for rehearing, arguing that counsel’s error was so prejudicial to his credibility-based defense that prejudice should be presumed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prejudice should be presumed under Strickland where counsel elicited and left an extraneous sexual-offense charge and an admission of untruthfulness while defendant testified	Miranda: Counsel’s elicitation of the charge and the witness’s admission irreparably damaged his credibility; because the defense rested on credibility, prejudice is so likely it should be presumed	State: The extraneous-offense evidence was extremely brief and Miranda did not affirmatively prove prejudice required by Strickland’s second prong	Court of Appeals: Counsel’s performance could be deficient, but Miranda did not demonstrate prejudice under Strickland because the extraneous evidence was brief (rehearing sought arguing prejudice should be presumed)

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel; prejudice ordinarily must be shown)
United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984) (identifies circumstances where prejudice from counsel’s errors may be presumed)