Barnett v. State
2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 4456
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Barnett was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon for threatening James Bryan with a knife during a Sunriser Diner confrontation.
- Witnesses described Barnett shoving Bryan, displaying a two-inch knife, and threatening to cut or kill him; several witnesses testified to the knife and threats, while some testified only to Brandett’s display.
- The jury found Barnett guilty and sentenced him to fifty years’ imprisonment; the record includes trial and motion-for-new-trial proceedings.
- Barnett challenged the conviction and various trial issues on appeal, including sufficiency of the evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, evidentiary rulings, and trial procedure.
- The court of appeals affirmed, addressing each challenge and concluding no reversible error occurred.
- Key procedural posture: post-verdict appeal following a new-trial hearing; the appellate court applies Strickland and standard sufficiency review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Barnett | State | Legal sufficiency supported by witnesses’ credible testimony and knife display. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Barnett | Coyle’s strategy/decisions were reasonable | No reversible error; multiple grounds failed to show deficient performance or prejudice. |
| Deadly weapon testimony by officer | Barnett | Officer properly testified as lay witness | Permissible lay testimony that knife could be a deadly weapon. |
| Appellate complaint of bolstering preservation | Barnett | Record shows non-preservation | Not preserved for review under Rule 33.1. |
| Definition of serious bodily injury in charge | Barnett | Not required given indictment and definitions | Fundamental-error analysis applied; no reversible harm shown; definition not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (legal-sufficiency review requires considering evidence in light most favorable to judgment)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1980) (conviction based on legally sufficient evidence when rational jury could find elements beyond reasonable doubt)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel; deficient performance and prejudice)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003) (deficient investigation in mitigating evidence may violate Strickland if not reasonable)
- Milburn v. State, 15 S.W.3d 267 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000) (sentencing mitigation investigation reasonable if evidence would not help; focus on reasonableness of investigation)
- Remsburg v. State, 219 S.W.3d 541 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2007) (serious bodily injury definition not required when not in indictment; focus on harm shown by record)