Riley, Billy Dee Jr.
2012 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1217
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2012Background
- Murder defendant Riley was beaten at a nightclub; he retrieved a gun and shot an unarmed person during the ensuing chaos.
- Jury convicted Riley of murder and sentenced him to 50 years’ imprisonment; the guilt phase included self-defense and lesser-included offenses.
- Defense counsel advised eligibility for probation if convicted of murder; at trial, trial strategy focused on self-defense; post-conviction, Riley learned he was ineligible for probation if convicted of murder.
- Riley filed a motion for new trial alleging ineffective assistance of counsel; affidavits from Riley and counsel state erroneous probation advice and lack of trial strategy justification.
- The court of appeals reversed, finding ineffective assistance and that the record showed a reasonable probability of a different outcome; the State petitioned for discretionary review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel’s erroneous probation advice was deficient under Strickland | Riley argues deficiency shown; counsel misinformed about probation eligibility | State concedes first-prong deficiency | Deficient performance established |
| Whether the prejudice prong was satisfied by a reasonable probability of different outcome | Riley would have pleaded open and sought deferred adjudication if properly advised | Outcome unlikely to differ; defense could still fail under different trial path | Prejudice not shown; not a reasonable probability of a different outcome |
| Whether appellate review properly handled credibility/affidavits and trial court findings | Appellate court should credit affidavits showing prejudice | Trial court credibility findings control; affidavits alone insufficient | Affidavits alone insufficient; defer to trial court’s credibility determinations |
| Whether the proper standard of review applies to a motion for new trial based on ineffective assistance | Abuse-of-discretion standard governs, with deference to trial court findings | Defer to trial court’s implicit factual findings if reasonable | Standard of review applied; deference to trial court’s factual determinations |
| Remand and scope of appeal after reversal on ineffective assistance | Court should address remaining issues after remand | Remand appropriate to address other errors | Remand to court of appeals for consistent proceedings under this opinion |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-prong standard for ineffective assistance)
- Recer, 815 S.W.2d 730 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (test for credibility of affidavits in new-trial context)
- Mercado v. State, 615 S.W.2d 225 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981) (choice between jury and judge for sentencing affects supervision eligibility)
- Kober v. State, 988 S.W.2d 230 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (affidavit reliability and live testimony considerations)
- Charles v. State, 146 S.W.3d 204 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (deference to trial court findings on historical facts and credibility)
- Webb v. State, 232 S.W.3d 109 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (standard for appellate deferential review of trial court rulings)
- Ex parte Rogers, 369 S.W.3d 858 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (treatment of mixed questions of law and fact in Strickland context)