Case ID: sw2d_991/html/0803-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Isidoro Ramirez OLIVA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas.
    No. 651-97.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.
    Oct. 28, 1998.
    Ira Perz, Houston, for appellant.
    Julie Klibert, Assistant District Attorney, Houston, Matthew Paul, State’s Prosecuting Attorney, Austin, for State.
   OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted appellant of aggravated sexual assault and assessed his punishment at confinement for fifty years. On direct appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case for a new punishment hearing based on its determination appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel at the punishment phase of his trial. Oliva v. State, 942 S.W.2d 727 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1997).

We granted discretionary review to de- ' termine, among other things, whether the Duffy standard should continue to apply to claims of ineffective assistance of counsel at the punishment phase of a noncapital sentencing proceeding. See Ex parte Duffy, 607 S.W.2d 507 (Tex.Cr.App.1980). The Court has decided to dismiss the State’s petition for discretionary review as improvidently granted.

WOMACK, J., dissents.