White, Erik, PD-1061-15

White was charged with two Burglary of a Habitation and two Aggravated Robbery with a Deadly Weapon counts; he pled guilty to all four charges and the court sentenced him to 20 years for burglary counts and life for robbery counts.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to sever the co-defendants’ trials and that counsel was not ineffective for not seeking recusal based on the judge’s relationship with a complaining witness.
Appellant challenged the Court of Appeals’ conclusions in a petition for discretionary review, arguing ineffective assistance and errors requiring reversal or remand.
Under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 36.09, co-defendants may be tried jointly or separately; appellant contends severance should have been sought prior to trial.
The trial judge disclosed familiarity with a complainant from church; counsel failed to inquire further about possible impact on sentencing or recusal concerns.
The analysis relies on Strickland and related authorities requiring showing of deficient performance and prejudice, with deference to trial strategy and the need for an explanatory record.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Severance failure and ineffective assistance	White argues trial counsel failed to seek severance, prejudicing him.	State contends no outrageous or ineffective performance evidenced; severance not required by record.	Court should grant review on severance issue
Judge recusal and relationship with witness	White argues counsel should have sought recusal or explored judge’s relationship with a complainant.	State contends absence of need for further inquiry under record and assurances.	Court should grant review on recusal issue

Bone v. State, 77 S.W.3d 828 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (preponderance standard for ineffective assistance; record must show meritorious claim)
Garcia v. State, 57 S.W.3d 436 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (requirement that trial conduct be so outrageous no competent attorney would act)
Goodspeed v. State, 187 S.W.3d 390 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (framework for examining ineffective assistance claims)
McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (1969) (right to counsel; standard of effective assistance)
Rylander v. State, 101 S.W.3d 107 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (trial courts deserve opportunity to explain actions before finding ineffective assistance)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes deficient performance and prejudice standard)
Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (preponderance of the evidence in evaluating claims)
Tong v. State, 25 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (application of ineffective assistance standards)
Jaynes v. State, 216 S.W.3d 839 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006, no pet.) (comparison of defendant's and co-defendant's punishment considerations)