diminished capacity defense in Texas

2018Id. 7 The court, in reiterating that Texas does not recognize a diminished- capacity defense, held that evidence of the defendant’s mental illness was inadmissible because it did not tend to negate the requisite mens rea.

2009Jackson v. State, 160 S.W.3d 568, 573 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005).5 The diminished capacity doctrine at issue here is “simply a failure-of-proof defense in which [Appellant] claims that the State failed to prove that [he] had the required state of mind at the time of the offense.” Id.

2026See Mays v. State, 318 S.W.3d 368, 381 (Tex. Crim.

2019Acevedo, 2011 7 WL 5607630 at *1; see also Mays, 318 S.W.3d at 380–81; Ruffin, 270 S.W.3d at 593 ; Jackson, 160 S.W.3d at 573–74.

2008In support of her argument, Dornak cites a single case-- Johnson v. State , 673 S.W.2d 190, 194 (Tex. Crim.

2008In support of her argument, Dornak cites a single case—Johnson v. State, 673 S.W.2d 190, 194 (Tex. Crim.

2010ANN. art. 26.13(b) (Vernon Supp. 2009). ―A plea of guilty is not knowingly and voluntarily entered if it is made as a result of ineffective assistance of counsel.‖1 Ex parte Burns, 601 S.W.2d 370, 372 (Tex. Crim. 1 Hart also complains his counsel‘s ineffectiveness, in failing to consider or admonish Hart on the availability of the diminished capacity defense, led to an involuntary guilty plea, a ground which we need not consider.