Jason Lee Rigsby v. State, 01-15-00946-CR

Police served a felony arrest warrant at a residence and encountered Shane McCain (warrant subject) and appellant Jason Rigsby near a pickup truck at night.
Rigsby was on the driver’s side; McCain was near the open passenger door. A black-and-clear canister was visible on the driver’s seat.
Deputies detained both men, recovered the canister from the driver’s seat, and arrested Rigsby; lab testing confirmed the canister contained methamphetamine (<1 gram).
Rigsby was charged with knowingly or intentionally possessing methamphetamine (<1 gram).
Trial evidence emphasized the canister’s plain view on the driver’s seat within Rigsby’s reach, Rigsby’s statement that he had borrowed the truck, and Rigsby lowering his hands when first ordered to raise them.
Rigsby argued ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal, claiming trial counsel failed to object to (1) hearsay statements attributing the drugs to Rigsby and (2) officer testimony that amounted to legal conclusions or comments on the weight of the evidence. The trial court’s guilty verdict and sentence (two years’ confinement, suspended; 5 years’ probation; $100 fine) were affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Counsel failed to object to officers’ hearsay statements attributing the drugs to Rigsby	Trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to multiple officer statements relaying McCain’s and Ashley’s on-scene assertions that the meth belonged to Rigsby	Even assuming failure to object was deficient, the remaining admissible evidence—plain-view placement on driver’s seat, Rigsby’s location and control of the vehicle, statement about borrowing truck, and jury instruction—makes a different outcome unlikely	No prejudice under Strickland; failure to object did not create reasonable probability of different result
Counsel failed to object to officers’ testimony as legal conclusions or comment on weight of evidence	Trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to officers’ testimony describing possession, care/custody/control, and assigning responsibility for items in the truck	The jury charge correctly defined possession and instructed on knowingly/intentionally elements and burden of proof; any improper effect of testimony was minimized and not outcome-determinative	No prejudice under Strickland; jury instructions and evidence overcome claimed error

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
Robertson v. State, 187 S.W.3d 475 (presumption of reasonable professional assistance)
Lopez v. State, 343 S.W.3d 137 (Strickland application in Texas)
Evans v. State, 202 S.W.3d 158 (elements of possession)
Poindexter v. State, 153 S.W.3d 402 (possession may be shown circumstantially)
Andrews v. State, 159 S.W.3d 98 (prejudice prong focus)
Cox v. State, 389 S.W.3d 817 (Strickland second-prong discussion)