Appellate Argument

docx

School

San Antonio College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1301

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BaronLyrebirdPerson1010

NO. 08-23-00125-CR COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS RAYMOND DIEGO REYES V. STATE OF TEXAS FROM THE 218TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, ATASCOSA COUNTY, TEXAS CAUSE NO. 21-02-0083-CRA, THE HONORABLE RUSSELL WILSON PRESIDING APPELLANT John M. Lamerson State Bar No. 24076495 The Lamerson Law Firm P.O. Box 241 Corpus Christi, TX 78403 Tel: (361) 816-9969 Fax: (210) 634-2422 lamersonlawfirm@gmail.com ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED 1

NO. 08-23-00125-CR COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS RAYMOND DIEGO REYES V. STATE OF TEXAS FROM THE 218TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, ATASCOSA COUNTY, TEXAS CAUSE NO. 21-02-0083-CRA, THE HONORABLE RUSSELL WILSON PRESIDING NOW COMES , Defendant, Appellant herein, files and submit his Brief in this appeal from a judgment of guilty, and would respectfully show as follows: 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents …………………………. 3 Identity of Parties and Counsel …………….…………… 4 Index of Authorities ………………………….…………… 5 Statement of the Case ………………………….…………… 6 Oral Argument ……………………………………………... 6 Issues Presented ………………………….…………… 6 A. The Defendant’s original plea of guilty was involuntary, and the consequences were not explained to the Defendant. The Defendant did not receive any effective assistance of counsel. Statement of Facts ………………………….…………… 7 Summary of the Argument ................................................ 8 Argument ......................................................................... 9 A. Issue 1 – Involuntary Plea …………………………. 9 Prayer .......................................................................... 10 Certificate of Service ....................................................... 11 Certificate of Compliance .................................................... 12 3

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL Appellant : Raymond Diego Reyes Counsel for Appellant at Trial: Mr. Alfonso Cabanas SBOT No. 01128850 Cabanas Law Firm, PLLC 4500 S Flores Street, Ste. 104 San Antonio, Texas 78214 Counsel for Appellant on Appeal: John M. Lamerson SBOT No. 24076495 The Lamerson Law Firm P.O. Box 241 Corpus Christi, TX 78403 Counsel for State at Trial: Mr. Ryan Kyle Wright SBOT No. 24071477 Ms. Erica Price SBOT No. 24075846 81st Judicial District Attorney’s Office 1105 A Street Floresville, Texas 78114 State Appellate Counsel: Mr. William Richmond SBOT No. 24085552 218th Judicial District Attorney’s Office 1105 A Street Floresville, Texas 78114 4

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES Texas Cases Craig v. State , 825 S.W.2d 128 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992) ……………. 7 Ex parte Felton , 815 S.W.2d 733 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991) ………………. 7 Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 808 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999) ……………. 7 Federal Cases Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984) …………………... 7 5

STATEMENT OF THE CASE On February 5, 2021, Defendant was indicted for Intoxication Manslaughter, a second-degree felony pursuant to Tex. Pen. Code sec. 49.08(b) and Intoxication Assault, a third-degree felony pursuant to Tex. Pen. Code sec. 49.07(c) (CR 5-6). On December 7, 2022, the Defendant pled guilty to the offenses, a plea that was accepted by Judge Brendel, who found the Defendant to be guilty (SRRv1 11:15-17). On February 22, 2023, after testimony was taken, the Defendant was sentenced. The Defendant was sentenced to sixteen (16) years on Count 1 and ten (10) years on Count 2, with credit for time served, no fine (RRv1 69:18-70:1). A notice of appeal was filed on February 24, 2023 (CR 48-49), and this appellate counsel was appointed on July 10, 2023 (SCR 4). ORAL ARGUMENT The Appellant requests oral argument. ISSUES PRESENTED Issue 1: The Defendant’s original plea of guilty was involuntary, and the consequences were not explained to the Defendant. The Defendant did not receive any effective assistance of counsel. STATEMENT OF FACTS 6

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

On February 5, 2021, Defendant was indicted for Intoxication Manslaughter, a second-degree felony pursuant to Tex. Pen. Code sec. 49.08(b) and Intoxication Assault, a third-degree felony pursuant to Tex. Pen. Code sec. 49.07(c). On December 7, 2022, the Defendant pled guilty to the offenses, a plea accepted by Judge Brendel, who found the Defendant guilty. A pretrial sentence investigation was ordered in which the Defendant was examined whether he was appropriate for community supervision. Any allegations of insufficiency of counsel must be firmly founded in the record, and the record must 12 affirmatively demonstrate the inconsistencies. Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 808, 814 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999). In order to sustain a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, an appellant must show that (1) appellant’s attorney’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) but for the counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding may have been different. Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 (1984). SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 7

ARGUMENT 8

Issue 1: The Defendant’s original plea of guilty was involuntary, and the consequences were not explained to the Defendant. The Defendant did not receive any effective assistance of counsel. An appellate court should consider whether counsel was reasonably likely to render effective assistance, and whether counsel reasonably rendered effective assistance at trial. Craig v. State , 825 S.W.2d 128, 130 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992). The effectiveness of counsel is ordinarily gauged by the totality of the representation, but a single error, if sufficiently egregious, can constitute ineffective assistance. Ex parte Felton , 815 S.W.2d 11 733, 740 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). PRAYER 9

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

The Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant his request to find that the Defendant was denied a fair trial for the reasons stated above. The Defendant respectfully requests that the trial court’s judgment be reversed and the Defendant be granted a new trial. Respectfully Submitted John M. Lamerson State Bar No. 24076495 P.O. Box 241 Corpus Christi, Texas 78403 Telephone: (361) 816-9969 Facsimile: (210) 634-2422 lamersonlawfirm@gmail.com By /S/ John M. Lamerson JOHN M. LAMERSON Attorney for Defendant Raymond Diego Reyes CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 10

I hereby certify that a true, correct, and complete copy of the foregoing was served on William Richmond, Assistant Atascosa County Criminal District Attorney, 1105 A Street, Floresville, TX 78114 via e-file (william.richmond@81stda.org) in accordance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure on this day,______________________. /S/ John M. Lamerson JOHN M. LAMERSON RULE 9.4(I) CERTIFICATION 11

In compliance with the Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i)(3), I certify that the number of words in this brief, excluding those matters listed in Rule 9.4(i)(I), is _______ per the Word software used to write this document. /S/ John M. Lamerson JOHN M. LAMERSON 12

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Appellate Argument

Related Documents