Ex Parte William West Riley
03-16-00350-CR
| Tex. App. | Oct 11, 2016Background
- Riley was charged with misdemeanor assault causing bodily injury (family violence); he pleaded no contest under a plea agreement for 12 months deferred adjudication, a fine, counseling, and an affirmative family-violence finding.
- The State later moved to adjudicate for alleged probation violations; Riley was unsatisfactorily released from deferred adjudication.
- Riley filed an art. 11.072 habeas application claiming his plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance: (1) counsel allegedly told him rejecting the plea could result in felony exposure, and (2) counsel failed to advise about firearms/military consequences.
- At the habeas hearing the court found defense counsel credible and Riley not credible, concluding counsel told Riley the prosecution might seek felony enhancement but did not inaccurately promise nondisclosure or advise regarding military eligibility.
- The court denied relief; Riley appealed the denial of the writ. The court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Riley's Argument | Campbell/State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel gave deficient advice about potential felony exposure | Riley: counsel told him rejecting the plea would expose him to felony charges and far greater punishment | Counsel: he informed Riley the prosecutor was "contemplating" felony enhancement; he provided available offers and used affidavit of non-prosecution in negotiation | Held: No deficient performance; trial court credited counsel; counsel warned of possible felony review, not falsely assured felony would follow |
| Whether counsel failed to advise of firearms/military consequences making plea involuntary | Riley: counsel said deferred adjudication would not block joining Marines; failure to advise on military/firearms consequences was ineffective assistance | Counsel: does not recall discussing military with Riley; may have discussed military only with Riley's mother; denied giving inaccurate advice | Held: Even assuming a duty to advise, Riley failed to show prejudice — it was not reasonable he would have rejected the plea given strong evidence and benefits of deferred adjudication |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes deficient performance and prejudice test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (counsel must advise noncitizen defendants about deportation risk from plea)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice inquiry in guilty-plea ineffective-assistance context focuses on whether defendant would have insisted on trial)
- Ex parte Wheeler, 203 S.W.3d 317 (appellate review of habeas denial for abuse of discretion)
- Ex parte Torres, 483 S.W.3d 35 (application of Strickland and Padilla principles to plea-related ineffective-assistance claims)