Webb, Michael Renard, WR-81,989-03

Background

Michael Renard Webb pleaded guilty in March 2012 to three drug offenses (manufacture/delivery of cocaine; two with drug‑free‑zone enhancements) in consolidated plea hearings and received concurrent prison terms (30, 40, and 20 years). He had previously been convicted and sentenced to life for aggravated assault on a public servant in a companion case tried earlier.
Webb filed state habeas applications alleging (1) his guilty pleas were involuntary based on erroneous advice from trial counsel about potential "stacking" (consecutive service) with his life sentence; (2) ineffective assistance of trial counsel for inadequate investigation and other omissions; and (3) the trial court abused its discretion by taking his plea concurrently with another unrelated defendant, which caused confusion.
Webb contends counsel told him any sentences from the remaining drug cases could be cumulated with the life sentence, and that he would not have pleaded guilty if he had known cumulation was legally precluded for offenses arising from the same criminal episode.
Trial counsel (Waldron and Curry) submitted affidavits stating they discussed trial strategy and the potential for stacking; they maintained stacking was a realistic possibility and that Webb did not object to the group plea procedure.
The State argues Webb failed to prove counsel’s performance was deficient or prejudicial under Strickland, that cumulation was possible because the State could have prosecuted separately, and that Webb forfeited the group‑plea complaint by not objecting at the hearing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Webb’s guilty pleas were involuntary because counsel erroneously advised stacking was possible	Webb: counsel misadvised him that sentences from the drug cases could be run consecutive to his life sentence; he would have insisted on trial but for that advice	State/Counsel: advice was within reason because the State could have prosecuted separately; stacking therefore possible	Court rejected Webb’s claim — counsel’s advice not shown to be outside attorney competence; stacking was a realistic possibility, so plea involuntariness not established
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate, obtain an investigator, check for fingerprints/DNA, and object to group plea procedure	Webb: counsel failed to investigate or secure resources, failed to check physical evidence, and acquiesced to a confusing joint plea, causing prejudice	State/Counsel: counsel hired an investigator where needed; Webb failed to show what additional investigation would have produced or that outcome would differ; group pleas are permissible and Webb made no contemporaneous objection	Court held Webb failed to carry Strickland burden — no deficient performance or demonstrated prejudice; investigatory failures not shown to have altered outcome
Whether the trial court abused discretion by conducting a group plea admonishment with an unrelated defendant	Webb: simultaneous pleas caused confusion and contributed to involuntary pleas	State: group plea procedure is allowed; Webb did not object at the hearing or on direct appeal and thus forfeited the claim	Court held Webb forfeited the claim by not objecting and rejected abuse‑of‑discretion claim
Whether habeas relief requires a live fact hearing because counsel affidavits purportedly were improperly filed in a consolidated supplemental answer	Webb: State’s consolidated filing violated rules; affidavits should be stricken and habeas court should remand for proper filing	State: affidavits were filed and considered; court designated and received counsel affidavits for resolution	Court treated the affidavits as part of the record and resolved claims on the existing submissions (no relief granted)

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance + prejudice)
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (right to counsel fundamental to fair trial)
McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (right to effective assistance includes competent counsel advising pleas)
Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (ineffective assistance and risk of injustice in trial process)
Ex parte Harrington, 310 S.W.3d 452 (Texas standard for voluntariness of plea based on counsel advice)
Ex parte Pharr, 897 S.W.2d 795 (sentences for offenses from same criminal episode and cumulation limits)
Ex parte Rains, 555 S.W.2d 478 (applicant bears burden in habeas to prove allegations)