WHETHER PETITIONER WAS DENIED HIS 6TH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL

No question identified. : c | Question fog Review iin ComPitance Wirn Rule (4 @) | 1) WHETHER PETITIONER WAS DENIEO Ms TH Anenoment Rigur | To Effective ASSISTANCE OF Counsel a) WieTHer Te Guilty Pica Waé Knowin6ly, INTELLIGENTLY Ano Voluntarily ENTEREO, { i . ' Parties To PRoceeoinG . VW fomPitance With Rute (bh) (i) ANO Rule 12,.b i H Ken Paxton \ Atrorwey GENERAL Of TEXAS ) P.o.Box 12548 Austin Ty TB 7I2548 amy E : Thomp sow | _ Asst Disteutr Airy . , Haeris Court, TAs | S 00 Jefferson Suite Leo0 | HousTeN |TX Toor C13) 224 S990 | Teas BAR Tid 240 2H Fomp gon emily @ dao. heTy ner : | |! RilATeD CASES Ex FARTE CHnbd ImAlL WA-92,71$0-02 (Tex. Crim APA, 2022) MALL V STATE, 14-11-0065 Y-CR, 20/5 WL 362659 (ever, 2015 ) ‘ . | | 4 |