Hill v. State

Full title: YUNIKA LOUISHKA HILL, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, Waco

Date published: Sep 15, 2004

No. 10-03-00236-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 15, 2004)

Opinion

No. 10-03-00236-CR

Opinion delivered and filed September 15, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court # F02-53871-K. Affirmed.

Kenneth Weatherspoon, Attorney at Law, Dallas, TX, for appellant/relator. Cherly D. Holder, Dallas County Asst. District Attorney, Dallas, TX, for appellee/respondent.

Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice VANCE, and Justice REYNA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

TOM GRAY, Chief Justice.

This appeal concerns a conviction for felony theft. We will affirm. Appellant contends that trial counsel did not render the effective assistance of counsel. Appellant argues that counsel should have subpoenaed an eyewitness and Appellant's codefendant. The record does not show the reasons for counsel's conduct. See Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-506 (2003); Murphy v. State, 112 S.W.3d 592, 601 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003), cert. denied, 124 S.Ct. 1660 (2004). Nor does the record show that counsel's conduct could never constitute legitimate trial strategy. See Murphy at 601. We overrule Appellant's issue. We affirm the judgment.