Ex Parte Richard Mark Bowman
444 S.W.3d 272
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- Ex parte Bowman seeks post-conviction habeas relief from a 2005 misdemeanor DWI conviction in Harris County; the trial court denied relief and the First District denied relief on rehearing.
- Bowman alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to impeach the arresting officer with evidence of the officer’s overtime-pay incentives and other impeachment materials.
- Trial testimony included a DUI arrest based on speeding and officer observations of intoxication; field sobriety tests were administered and recorded on video.
- The habeas record included extensive materials on Officer Lindsey’s overtime pay, disciplinary history, and third-party opinions about DWI arrest practices; the trial court found defense strategy reasonable despite deficiencies.
- On appeal, the court found trial counsel’s failure to obtain Lindsey’s payroll records to impeach credibility unreasonable and that the arrest video alone was not sufficient to sustain the conviction without credible impeachment evidence.
- The court reversed the trial court, granted habeas relief, set aside the 2005 judgment, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Bowman claims trial counsel failed to investigate and impeach | Bowman asserts counsel’s strategy fell within reasonable professional judgment | Trial counsel deficient; relief granted |
| Laches | State did not plead laches in trial court but urged it on appeal | State contends laches bars relief | Waived; not preserved for review |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Ex parte Welborn, 785 S.W.2d 391 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (duty to make independent investigation of facts)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (U.S. 2003) (reasonableness of investigation informs strategic decisions)
- Ex parte Richardson, 70 S.W.3d 865 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (reasonableness and standards for habeas review)
- Ex parte Peterson, 117 S.W.3d 804 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (abuse-of-discretion review in credibility-based determinations)
- Ex parte Perez, 398 S.W.3d 206 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (laches in habeas context and related standards)