• Court of Appeals of Texas, Eighth District
  • 08-16-00058-CR
Following a single vehicle accident, appellant performed poorly on the field sobriety test and his blood alcohol was ultimately measured at 0.202grams. Few of the facts were seriously contested at trial; however, appellant's trial strategy challenged whether he was operating the motor vehicle involved in the crash. At the close of respondent's case, appellant was denied a directed verdict and rested without presenting any evidence. A jury convicted appellant of DWI, second offense and appellant was assessed a one-year sentence and fine. Appellant moved for, and was denied, a new trial citing that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to follow up on an eyewitness, and for failing to obtain and admit several exhibits. To prevail on a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, appellant must establish by a preponderance of evidence that: (1) his attorney's performance was deficient; and that (2) his attorney's deficient performance deprived him of a fair trial. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 669, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2055, 80 L.Ed2d 674 (1984). On appeal, the court affirmed holding counsel's performance was not deficient. The court noted that counsel was not faulted for failing to obtain and admit an exhibit that was duplicative of what was already in evidence nor was assistance guaranteed to be errorless or perfect. The court concluded that appellant had failed to demonstrate that trial counsel's performance was deficient or that if so, any error was prejudicial. Accordingly, the court affirmed the conviction. James Audie Ohnemus v. The State of Texas, El Paso Court of Appeals, Case No.: 08-16-00058-CR, 09/27/2017

This premium content is reserved for Texas Lawyer subscribers.

Continue reading by getting started with a subscription.

Already a subscriber? Log in now