record establishes error in Texas

2026When, as here, the defendant objects 15 during the proceedings below, we must determine whether the record establishes that the error caused him “some harm.” See Reeves v. State, 420 S.W.3d 812, 816 (Tex. Crim.

2026If the defendant objected, he will obtain relief if the record shows that he suffered 23 “some harm.” Reeves v. State, 420 S.W.3d 812, 816 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013).

2026See Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776, 790 (1987) (attorney was not ineffective when he was “aware of some, but not all of [petitioner’s] family history prior to . . . trial” and made “the reasonable decision that his client’s interest would not be served by presenting this type of evidence”); Hocko v. State, 590 S.W.3d 680, 696 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, pet. ref’d) (“[A]n attorney’s decision not to present particular witnesses at the punishment stage may be strategically sound if based on a determination that the testimony of the witnesses may harm the defendant.”); Lampkin, 470 S.W.3d

2026See Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776, 790 (1987) (attorney was not ineffective when he was “aware of some, but not all of [petitioner’s] family history prior to . . . trial” and made “the reasonable decision that his client’s interest would not be served by presenting this type of evidence”); Hocko v. State, 590 S.W.3d 680, 696 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, pet. ref’d) (“[A]n attorney’s decision not to present particular witnesses at the punishment stage may be strategically sound if based on a determination that the testimony of the witnesses may harm the defendant.”); Lampkin, 470 S.W.3d

2026See Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776, 790 (1987) (attorney was not ineffective when he was “aware of some, but not all of [petitioner’s] family history prior to . . . trial” and made “the reasonable decision that his client’s interest would not be served by presenting this type of evidence”); Hocko v. State, 590 S.W.3d 680, 696 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, pet. ref’d) (“[A]n attorney’s decision not to present particular witnesses at the punishment stage may be strategically sound if based on a determination that the testimony of the witnesses may harm the defendant.”); Lampkin, 470 S.W.3d

2025See Williams v. State, 252 S.W.3d 353 , 355-56 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (explaining that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel includes the reciprocal right to self-representation; once the right is clearly and unequivocally asserted, the trial court must inform the defendant about the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation so that the record establishes that the waiver of counsel is intelligently and voluntarily made); see also Faretta, 422 U.S. at 818-19.

2025See Williams v. State, 252 S.W.3d 353 , 355-56 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (explaining that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel includes the reciprocal right to self-representation; once the right is clearly and unequivocally asserted, the trial court must inform the defendant about the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation so that the record establishes that the waiver of counsel is intelligently and voluntarily made); see also Faretta, 422 U.S. at 818-19.

2024Vickery v. Vickery, 999 S.W.2d 342, 365 (Tex. 1999).

2024See Nix v. State, 65 S.W.3d 664, 667 (Tex. Crim.

2023“Neither party bears a burden of production or persuasion with respect to an Almanza harm analysis, the question being simply what the record demonstrates.” Hollander v. State, 414 S.W.3d 746 , 749-50 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (citing Warner v. State, 245 S.W.3d 458, 464 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)).

2023The Court of Criminal Appeals has similarly suggested that “in cases in which the prior relationship between the victim and the accused is a material issue, illustrating the nature of the relationship may be the purpose for which evidence of prior bad acts will be admissible.” Garcia v. State, 201 S.W.3d 695, 703 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). 22 defendant does not make a timely objection during the proceedings below, we must determine whether the record establishes that the error caused him “egregious harm.” See Gonzalez v. State, 610 S.W.3d 22 , 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2020).

2022See Coble, 330 S.W.3d at 292 .

2011See Thompson, 9 S.W.3d at 814 .

2005See id.