Hernandez v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court 1
OPINION
2Opinion of the Court · McCORMICKMcCORMICK, P.J.
which KELLER, HOLLAND, WOMACK and KEASLER, JJ., joined.
We granted discretionary review in this ease to reexamine, as a matter of state and federal constitutional law, whether to apply the two-prong Strickland v. Washington1 standard or the Ex parte Duffy2 standard to ineffective assistance of counsel claims “alleging a deficiency in attorney performance” at noncapital sentencing proceedings. We hold Strickland applies to these claims.3
*771In Duffy a three-judge plurality of this Court decided, as a matter of federal and state constitutional law, that the “reasonably effective assistance of…
3Cases cited15 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Hernandez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by1,451 opinions
- Trevino v. ThalerSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Mata v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2007
- Vasquez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2012
- Escobedo v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1999
- Ex Parte CrowCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005
1,446 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.