Shauntenette Telepak v. State, 08-16-00104-CR

Appellant Shauntenette Telepak and estranged husband Jeffrey (both former military) had a custody dispute over their child; Appellant was not on Jeffrey’s apartment lease and the couple had separated.
On Jan. 27, 2015, a confrontation occurred at Jeffrey’s apartment after Appellant came for the child and sippy cups; versions conflict about who pushed whom and whether Appellant choked Jeffrey.
Jeffrey sought emergency care that night; police observed red marks on his neck and a bruised toe and photographed injuries the next day.
Appellant admitted to holding her forearm against Jeffrey’s neck for about 30 seconds but asserted self-defense, claiming Jeffrey pushed her inside and repeatedly shoved her.
The State charged felony choking (impeding normal breathing); the jury convicted on the lesser-included misdemeanor assault and assessed punishment (one-year sentence suspended with community supervision and a fine).
On appeal Telepak challenged (1) sufficiency of the evidence and (2) ineffective assistance of her retained trial counsel; the court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for assault conviction	Appellant: evidence insufficient given conflicting accounts and claimed self-defense	State: testimony, photos, and officer observations supported bodily injury and jury could disbelieve self-defense	Affirmed — evidence sufficient for misdemeanor assault; jury could credit State and reject self-defense
Whether State disproved self-defense beyond reasonable doubt	Appellant: acted to protect herself from Jeffrey’s force	State: Appellant used excessive force and Jeffrey was privileged to push her (trespass)	Affirmed — jury could find force not justified and reject self-defense
Ineffective assistance — failure to object to leading questions, hearsay, exhibits, demonstrations, etc.	Appellant: counsel erred repeatedly, affecting verdict and sentencing	State: alleged failures were trial strategy, admissible, or not shown prejudicial; record does not show deficient performance	Affirmed — appellant failed to show deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland
Ineffective assistance — failure to present mitigation and waive jury sentencing	Appellant: counsel failed to present mitigating evidence and improperly waived jury sentencing	State: appellant did not identify additional mitigation or show counsel’s choice was deficient; record silent on election reasons	Affirmed — no showing of what missing mitigation would be or resulting prejudice