Background

• Appellant Mitzi Allgor was charged with Resisting Arrest (Class A misdemeanor) and Possession of Marijuana (under two ounces, Class B) in CF1302373 and CF1302374 in Nacogdoches County Court at law.
• Jury trial began Oct 13, 2014; evidence opened/closed Nov 20, 2014; punishment hearing held Jan 8, 2015.
• Jury found Allgor guilty on both counts; trial court imposed 240 days (Resisting Arrest) and 120 days (Marijuana), run concurrently.
• During the punishment phase, counsel stated Allgor was not eligible for probation, and the court echoed a misstatement of the law.
• The record shows misstatements regarding probation eligibility and minimum confinement, and no objections were raised by counsel.
• Appellant asserts ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington and related authorities, arguing these errors affected the trial’s outcome.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance standard: performance and prejudice)
• Hernandez v. State, 988 S.W.2d 770 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (prejudice standard in Strickland applied in Texas)
• Sanchez v. State, 222 S.W.3d 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (preserves two-prong Strickland analysis in Texas)
• Bryant v. State, 187 S.W.3d 397 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (judicial admissions and effect on proof)
• Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685 (U.S. 2002) (complete failure to test the State’s case triggers Cronic exception)
• United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1984) (presumes unreliability when counsel completely fails to test the case)
• Brooks v. State, 957 S.W.2d 30 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (notice issues affecting punishment permissible; impacts trial result)
• Hudson v. State, 145 S.W.3d 323 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004) (untimely notice on punishment enhancements)
• United States v. Williamson, 53 F.3d 1500 (10th Cir. 1995) (closing argument errors and affect on outcome)