Cox v. Texas (Original)
Annotate this Case
The issue in this case was whether defense counsel's misstatement in voir dire about the concurrent-sentencing law denied his client the effective assistance of counsel. The appellant was convicted of two counts of aggravated sexual assault and two counts of indecency with a child. The Second Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment as to punishment and remanded for a new punishment trial. The Supreme Court granted the State's petition for discretionary review on five grounds, all of which centered on the issue of ineffective assistance. Upon review, the Court held that the misstatement did not deny appellant the effective assistance of counsel.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.