# Jackson v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · June 1, 1994 · 877 S.W.2d 768

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9763481

## Case

- **Full name:** Melvin Leon JACKSON, Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** June 1, 1994
- **Citations:** 877 S.W.2d 768; 1994 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 64; 1994 WL 232373
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Maloney
- **Judges:** Campbell, Baird, Maloney, Overstreet
- **Cited by:** 2,490 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9763481

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that "we must presume that counsel is better positioned than the appellate court to judge the pragmatism of the particular case, and that he made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment" and that "[d]ue to the lack of evidence in t…
- concluding that appellant failed to meet his burden of showing that his trial counsel’s assistance was ineffective after reasoning, among other things, that “the actions of appellant’s trial counsel regarding venire members, Hartsfield and Deltoro are not material to our deter…
- holding that presumption that defendant had received effective assistance of counsel at trial was not rebutted by silent record in case in which trial counsel’s motivation for failing to challenge or strike juror, who had expressed bias against defendant, was unknown
- holding there was no deficient performance on silent record when counsel did not challenge or strike a juror who said his prior experience of being a victim of a burglary would probably impact his impartiality in the trial of the defendant for robbery
- holding that trial counsel's failure to challenge impartial juror did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel because record did not indicate why counsel did not strike that venire member

## Opinion text

MALONEY, Judge,
concurring.
While it is my opinion that appellant’s trial counsel failed to satisfy an objective standard for reasonable performance, because the record lacks any evidence that the second prong of Strickland was met, I can only concur in the result.
Under the first prong of Strickland, counsel’s performance must meet “an objective standard of reasonableness”. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Ex parte Walker, 777 S.W.2d 427, 430 (Tex.Crim.App.1989). Appellant was indicted for robbery. At voir dire, three prospective jurors who were recent victims of crime (burglary or robbery) stated that they could not be fair, but would be biased against appellant. I believe there can be no other conclusion than that the failure to strike or challenge these venireper-sons was not objectively reasonable. While counsel could conceivably have had some peculiar and unapparent reason for not striking a single prospective juror who stated he was biased against the defendant, Delrio v. State, 840 S.W.2d 443 (Tex.Crim.App.1992), it is inconceivable that counsel would have had such cause not to strike three venirepersons who stated they could not be impartial due to their bias against the defendant. See Ex parte Carillo, 687 S.W.2d 320, 324 (Tex.Crim.App.1985) (adequacy of representation viewed in light of totality).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9763481. Public record. Not legal advice.