*4 Under the second prong of Strickland, Olvera must show by a preponderance of the evidence that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on a jury trial. At the habeas hearing, Olvera testified that he and his sister asked counsel several times…
*3 In 2010, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. —-, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), in which it explained a criminal defense attorney’s duty to advise his client about the potential immigration consequences of a plea. In that case, Padilla pleaded guilty…
STANDARD OF REVIEW [1] An applicant for habeas corpus relief must prove his claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Kniatt v. State, 206 S.W.3d 657, 665 (Tex.Crim.App.2006). In reviewing a trial court’s order denying a writ application, we view the facts in the light most favorable to the trial…
— S.W.3d —-, 2012 WL 2336240 (Tex.App.-Dallas) NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE PERMANENT LAW REPORTS. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR WITHDRAWAL. Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas. Ex Parte Alfredo OLVERA. No. 05-11-01349-CR. June 20, 2012. On Appeal from the 199th…