Post Conviction Results
Two 45-year convictions vacated after a win at the Court of Criminal Appeals (Taylor County)
Summary
Our client was tried on an indictment the State had amended to add two new felony counts. His trial lawyer did not object or preserve an objection. After the Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed, we won discretionary review at the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which reversed in a published 2022 opinion. On remand in July 2024, the Eleventh Court vacated the two added convictions and both 45-year sentences.
Case at a glance
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Original conviction | Four counts tried on an amended indictment (jury trial, 2018) |
| Sentence | 45, 45, 35, and 25 years, concurrent |
| County / court | Taylor County, 104th District Court; appeal to the Eleventh Court of Appeals (Eastland) |
| Legal issue | Ineffective assistance: failure to object to counts added by amending the indictment (Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 28.10(c)) |
| Remedy | Motion for new trial, direct appeal, petition for discretionary review (PDR), appeal on remand |
| Outcome | Two convictions and both 45-year sentences vacated; the 35- and 25-year sentences remain |
| Decided | PDR filed Oct. 2021; CCA reversed 2022; vacated on remand July 18, 2024 |
| Court opinion | Jefferson v. State, 663 S.W.3d 758 (Tex. Crim. App. 2022); Jefferson v. State, No. 11-18-00184-CR (Tex. App.—Eastland July 18, 2024) |
The story
The State originally indicted our client on two counts. Shortly before trial, it amended the indictment to add two more felony counts. The jury convicted on all four.
Our firm did not handle the trial. When we took the case afterward, we saw that the added counts were new offenses, and Texas law does not allow new offenses to be added by amendment over an objection. The record showed no objection by our client’s trial counsel at the time.
The strategy and timeline
In plain terms: an indictment cannot authorize more convictions than the grand jury charged. A lawyer who lets two new felonies ride into trial without objecting has fallen short. And the harm is easy to see, because the client ended up with four convictions instead of two.
If you’re in a similar situation
A loss at the court of appeals is not always the end. The Court of Criminal Appeals can review a case when the lower court got the law wrong. A PDR is often the only way to get there before turning to a habeas writ.
Changes to the charges right before trial deserve close review. So does anything your lawyer agreed to off the record. Relief may be partial, as it was here, and it depends on the record.
Verification
Related pages
Disclaimer
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case depends on its own facts and law. This page describes a past matter handled by Blizzard & Zimmerman Attorneys and is not legal advice.