Paul Wayne Harris v. State, 14-14-00514-CR

Paul Wayne Harris was tried for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon; jury found him guilty and assessed 18 years’ confinement and an $8,000 fine.
Prosecution's key witness was Tiffany Harris, who reported Harris threatened her with a silver handgun; police responded to her apartment after a 911 call.
Tiffany had multiple protective orders against Harris but admitted on cross-examination she had permitted or encouraged many contacts with him while orders existed and had received victim compensation/moving assistance.
Defense theory at trial: Tiffany fabricated or orchestrated accusations out of anger; defense elicited testimony to impeach her credibility and highlighted lack of physical evidence tying a gun to Harris.
Appellant’s appellate complaint: trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to a continuing pattern of errors during trial and closing argument, and that this failure prejudiced the defense.
The State’s brief argues the record does not rebut the presumption of effective assistance, trial counsel pursued a coherent strategy, and appellant failed to show prejudice or provide an adequate record or briefing.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to numerous trial occurrences	Harris contends counsel should have objected at multiple points; cumulative failures made representation ineffective	State contends the record shows counsel pursued a coherent strategy (attack complainant credibility), elicited needed facts despite rulings, and the record is undeveloped regarding strategic reasons for any non‑objections	State argues the point is unproven; absent a developed record appellant cannot show deficient performance
Whether any alleged ineffectiveness prejudiced the outcome	Harris claims the purported failures prejudiced his trial result	State says appellant failed to brief or cite record showing prejudice and thus waived the issue; even on merits no showing of reasonable probability of a different outcome	State argues prejudice not established; point should be overruled and conviction affirmed

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong ineffective assistance standard requiring deficient performance and prejudice)
Salinas v. State, 163 S.W.3d 734 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (presumption of reasonable professional assistance; claims must be firmly founded in the record)
Chambers v. State, 903 S.W.2d 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (on direct appeal undeveloped record does not overcome presumption of effective assistance)
Jackson v. State, 877 S.W.2d 768 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (no reversal when record lacks evidence to rebut presumption of effective counsel)
Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (appellate briefing and record requirements for claims)
Nejnaoui v. State, 44 S.W.3d 111 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001) (need to cite legal authority and develop argument on appeal)