The appellant claims that defense counsel's misstatement in voir dire about the concurrent-sentencing law denied him the effective assistance of counsel. That the jury received incorrect information about punishment does not mean that the second prong of Strickland is necessarily satisfied. The court of appeals' judgment is reversed and the trial court's judgment is affirmed. Court of Criminal Appeals, No. PD-1886-11, 10-24-2012.
Font Size: 
Cox v. State
Tex. Crim. App.
October 25, 2012
This article requires premium access
This article requires premium access to Texas Lawyer. Please sign in or subscribe to read the full text.
