October Term 2012 · Docket 11-10189
Does Texas procedure bar ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal?
The dispute centers on whether Texas rules prevent defendants from raising ineffective assistance claims during direct appeal.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
the side that brought the case contends Texas rules effectively bar ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal. The state contends its procedures offer generous opportunities to raise these claims.
Justice Alito questioned the practicality of case-by-case determinations in other states. Justice Kennedy asked how the Court should formulate the rule if it favors the side that brought the case.
the side that brought the case cited Texas court statements that direct appeal is not the preferred route. The state argued its procedures provide constitutionally protected opportunities to raise claims.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 53-4 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 53-4
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of the Martinez rule. It asks if Texas procedures satisfy federal standards for raising ineffective assistance claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 25, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-17
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to find Texas procedures inadequate. This would allow the ineffective assistance claim to proceed.
The state wants the Court to uphold Texas procedures. This would keep the claim barred from federal review.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues Texas rules make it virtually impossible to raise these claims on direct appeal. This creates a procedural barrier that violates federal rights.
The state argues its procedures are among the most generous in the country. It claims defendants receive two opportunities to raise these claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if Martinez applies when Texas allows direct appeal but notes transcript limitations.
Chief Justice Roberts asked if the appellate court has ever allowed such claims on direct appeal before.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 53-4 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 53-4
Why it matters
This case defines the procedural path for raising ineffective assistance claims. It determines whether state rules can block federal review of these constitutional claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 53-4 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 53-4
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 49-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 49-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.