in the Matter of T.C., a Juvenile, 02-17-00007-CV

Juvenile T.C., adjudicated for indecency with a child at age 15, received a determinate 20‑year commitment to the Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) in 2014.
After ~24 months of custody, TJJD referred T.C. for a Texas Family Code §54.11 transfer hearing to determine whether he should be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ).
At the December 29, 2016 transfer hearing the State’s evidence consisted of the TJJD court liaison Leonard Cucolo’s testimony and written report (documenting 200+–248 disciplinary incidents, failure to advance from Stage 1, refusal of treatment/medication, and a July 2016 psychological evaluation finding no reduced sexual‑reoffending risk), T.C.’s testimony, and a stipulated summary of family testimony.
T.C. testified about educational programming, psychiatric contacts, medication side effects, suicide‑watch incidents, and continuing disciplinary problems—including a recent assault on staff—and requested to remain at TJJD.
T.C. argued on appeal that his appointed counsel at the transfer hearing rendered ineffective assistance by failing to request an independent psychiatric/psychological examination before the hearing.
The trial court ordered transfer to TDCJ; the court of appeals affirmed, rejecting T.C.’s ineffective‑assistance claim for failing to show entitlement to an appointed expert or deficient performance under Strickland.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for not requesting an independent mental‑health exam before the §54.11 transfer hearing	T.C.: counsel should have requested court‑appointed independent psychiatric/psychological exam to show mental‑health issues caused behavior and to assist defense	State/TJJD: record lacked evidence that mental health was a significant factor or that an expert was warranted; counsel not shown deficient	Court: Affirmed—T.C. failed Strickland; no threshold showing under Ake that mental health was a significant issue, so counsel’s omission not shown deficient or prejudicial

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (state must provide psychiatric assistance when sanity is a significant factor)
R.D.B. v. State, 20 S.W.3d 255 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000) (counsel ineffective for failing to seek court‑appointed mental‑health expert where organic brain injury and evidence made mental health a significant factor)
Nava v. State, 415 S.W.3d 289 (Strickland standard and strong presumption counsel’s conduct not deficient)
Menefield v. State, 363 S.W.3d 591 (appellate record usually inadequate for ineffective‑assistance claims; counsel should be given opportunity to explain strategy)
Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808 (review ineffective assistance under totality of representation)