X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
William Mitchell’s unusual choice of clothing — in particular, a shirt — played a part in his arrest and 80-year prison term for allegedly robbing a San Antonio, Texas, convenience store. And, according to a recent en banc opinion by San Antonio’s 4th Court of Appeals, that shirt may get him a new trial. According to the prosecution, Mitchell was wearing a blue shirt with a picture of a Scotch terrier on it when he was caught on video allegedly robbing a Stop-n-Go. He was wearing the same shirt when he appeared before a jury during voir dire. This is the second time the 4th Court has heard Mitchell’s appeal. “We again reverse and remand and direct the trial court to appoint new counsel,” Justice Tom Rickhoff wrote in the majority opinion in Mitchell v. Texas, No. 04-96-00643-CR. FRUSTRATION VENTED “Counsel’s failure to object before jurors saw the defendant in the distinctive outfit worn during the offense and when arrested, under these facts, constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel,” Rickhoff wrote. In a footnote, Rickhoff also vented his frustration at the 4th Court’s inability to analyze ineffective-assistance claims adequately when balanced with the assumption that defendants have able counsel. “Unless and until the Court of Criminal Appeals allows intermediate appellate courts a meaningful role in analyzing ineffective claims, we will be unable to ensure that this assumption is justified,” the court said. Mary Beth Walsh, an appellate lawyer at the Bexar County, Texas, district attorney’s office, said that she is considering filing a petition for discretionary review with the high court because Mitchell hasn’t proven that he was harmed by wearing the shirt to court. Mitchell’s appellate attorney, Michael S. Raign, is braced for another appeals round. “I’m just concerned about what the Court of Criminal Appeals is going to do … because everybody is effective these days,” said Raign, who didn’t represent Mitchell at trial.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.