Whether the decision below is irreconcilable with Lafler v. Cooper and the reasonable probability standard for analyzing prejudice in ineffective assistance of counsel claims

QUESTION PRESENTED Texas courts found no ineffective assistance of counsel in this criminal case where the Petitioner, Sergeant Patrick Martinez, rejected a pretrial plea offer because his attorney failed to advise him that he would not be eligible for parole if convicted. The State’s plea offer, which was available through the first day of trial, was ten-years deferred adjudication probation in return for the Sgt. Martinez’s plea of guilty. At trial, the jury sentenced the Martinez to fifty-two years in prison, every day of which he must serve. Thus, he will remain in prison until July 2, 2066 — unless he dies first. The trial attorney admitted that he incorrectly believed Sgt. Martinez would be parole eligible, that he failed to advise Martinez that he would not be eligible for parole if convicted, and that his failure may have influenced Sgt. Martinez’s decision to reject the deferred adjudication plea offer. Sgt. Martinez confirmed that he would have accepted the plea offer had he known that he would not be eligible for parole upon conviction. While the court below acknowledged that this explanation was a reasonable possibility for rejecting the plea offer, it denied Sgt. Martinez’s ineffective assistance claim because he did not disprove all other reasonable possibilities. The question presented is whether the decision below is irreconcilable with Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012) and this Court’s reasonable probability standard for analyzing prejudice in ineffective assistance of counsel claims. It is. This Court should summarily reverse. ii