Opinion
No. 10-08-00412-CR
Opinion delivered and filed March 31, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appealed from the 85th District Court, Brazos County, Texas, Trial Court No. 05-06031-CRF-85. Affirmed.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted James Monroe Lang of driving while intoxicated, with a child passenger under the age of fifteen. The trial court sentenced Lang to two years in State jail. Lang's appellate counsel filed an Anders brief presenting one potential issue. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Although informed of his right to do so, Lang did not file a pro se brief. Nor did the State file a brief. We affirm. In one potential issue, appellate counsel addresses whether Lang received ineffective assistance of counsel, identifying several instances when counsel acted or failed to act which Lang now contends were improper. To prove ineffective assistance, an appellant must show that: (1) counsel's performance was deficient; and (2) the defense was prejudiced by counsel's deficient performance. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984); see also Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 521, 123 S. Ct. 2527, 2535, 156 L. Ed. 2d 471 (2003). The record is silent as to any reasons explaining trial counsel's actions and we will not so speculate. See Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 814 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Absent a record revealing trial counsel's strategy or motivation, Lang cannot defeat the strong presumption that trial counsel's actions fell within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. Id. An ineffective assistance claim is better raised through an application for a writ of habeas corpus. See Rylander v. State, 101 S.W.3d 107, 110 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).