Jarvis Lamont Carnell v. State
535 S.W.3d 569
| Tex. App. | 2017Background
- Carnell was tried and convicted of misdemeanor family/dating assault on May 28, 2015, and sentenced to 240 days in jail.
- On the day of sentencing, his court-appointed trial counsel (Mark Ash) filed a motion to withdraw; the trial court granted the motion and also signed an order appointing appellate counsel but did not actually appoint substitute counsel.
- The 30-day period to file a motion for new trial ran from May 28 to June 29, 2015; no counsel was appointed during that period.
- Ash continued to receive court notices showing him as counsel of record and on July 22, 2015 filed a renewed motion to withdraw; the trial court granted that renewed motion but still did not appoint replacement counsel.
- A public defender was not appointed for Carnell until March 30, 2016—over nine months after the new-trial period ended.
- Carnell argued deprivation of counsel during the critical new-trial stage and requested abatement to file an out-of-time motion for new trial; the court agreed and abated the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Carnell was deprived of counsel during the 30-day motion-for-new-trial period | Carnell: trial counsel withdrew on day one and no substitute was appointed during the entire period, rebutting the presumption of continued representation | State: Ash continued to represent Carnell (received notices, later filed renewed motion), so no deprivation occurred | Court: Presumption of continued representation rebutted; Carnell was deprived of counsel for the entire period; harm presumed; abatement ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. 778 (recognizes Sixth Amendment right to counsel at critical stages)
- Cooks v. State, 240 S.W.3d 906 (motion-for-new-trial period is a critical stage; presumption trial counsel continues post-trial)
- Batiste v. State, 888 S.W.2d 9 (total deprivation of counsel at a critical stage presumes harm)
- Ward v. State, 740 S.W.2d 794 (proper remedy is abatement and remand to permit out‑of‑time new‑trial motion)
- Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 (total denial of counsel is constitutional error not subject to harmless‑error analysis)
- United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (absence of counsel at a critical stage can require presumed prejudice)