in Re Andy Sanchez
04-17-00615-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 25, 2017Background
- Relator Andy Sanchez (juvenile detained Nov 18, 2010) seeks a writ of habeas corpus challenging his certification/transfer and later no-contest plea in Bexar County cause 2010-JUV-02881.
- Sanchez alleges juvenile proceedings defects: summons allegedly issued to the wrong charge, signed by a mother whose parental rights had been terminated, and served by counsel rather than personally to the juvenile/parent as required.
- Sanchez contends the statutorily required juvenile process before adult prosecution (transfer hearing, examining trial, and grand jury) was not completed—specifically, he claims no mandatory examining trial occurred.
- He asserts ineffective assistance of counsel (trial counsel Hubert T. McCray) for failing to preserve objections, investigate/prosecute procedural defenses, and otherwise provide competent representation.
- He alleges an actual conflict of interest because the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office represented him in a CPS/termination matter (appointed to represent him in 2005-PA-01633) while prosecuting the criminal/juvenile matter, and Judge Lisa Jarrett denied his motion to recuse the DA’s office.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Sanchez: counsel failed to investigate, preserve objections, or follow juvenile procedure, undermining fairness | State: (not in petition) would likely argue counsel’s performance was adequate or waiver/strategy | Relator requests relief for Strickland violation; petition seeks evidentiary hearing (no court ruling in petition) |
| Conflict of interest / Recusal of DA | Sanchez: DA’s office concurrently represented him in CPS termination and prosecuted him, creating an actual conflict | State: (not in petition) would likely deny an actual conflict or assert no prejudice | Relator moved to recuse; motion denied by juvenile court judge; petition asks appellate court to grant recusal and appoint special prosecutor |
| Jurisdictional defect from defective waiver/transfer | Sanchez: summons/service and omission of required examining trial and other juvenile steps rendered subsequent proceedings void for lack of jurisdiction | State: (not in petition) would likely assert procedural requirements were satisfied or waived | Relator argues judgment is void and asks for habeas relief; petition requests evidentiary hearing (no ruling) |
| Defective service/summons | Sanchez: summons addressed the wrong offense, was signed by a parent without legal custody, and was filed late/served improperly | State: (not in petition) would likely assert service complied with Fam. Code or was waived | Relator alleges statutory noncompliance as basis to void certification/transfer; seeks writ (no decision in petition) |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Sup. Ct.) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (Sup. Ct.) (right to counsel and due process implications)
- Ex parte Hargett, 819 S.W.2d 866 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (district courts’ habeas authority under Tex. Const. art. V, §8)
- Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (jurisdictional defects and void judgments)
- Ex parte Patterson, 969 S.W.2d 16 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (void judgments are attackable at any time)
- Watson v. State, 587 S.W.2d 161 (Tex. Crim. App.) (juvenile transfer/procedure requirements)
- State ex rel. Sherrod v. Carey, 790 S.W.2d 705 (Tex. App.—Amarillo) (conflicts arising when prosecutor previously represented defendant)