## Facts

- Investigators received information that Joe Don McDonald was selling methamphetamine and arranged a controlled purchase by calling and texting him.
- McDonald sold methamphetamine to investigators for $175; the transaction was captured on video, and he was arrested immediately afterward.
- McDonald was charged with delivery of methamphetamine in an amount of one gram or more but less than four grams, with an enhancement allegation increasing the punishment range.
- After jury selection, McDonald pleaded guilty to the charged offense and pleaded “true” to the enhancement paragraph.
- A jury assessed punishment at 40 years’ confinement and no fine, and the trial court imposed sentence accordingly.

## Issues

1. Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance at the guilt stage, including failing to advise about or pursue an entrapment defense, thereby rendering McDonald’s guilty plea involuntary.
2. Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance at punishment by failing to object to questions and argument concerning parole and good-time laws.

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed the judgment.
- The court held McDonald did not meet his burden to show deficient performance or prejudice regarding counsel’s alleged failure to advise about or pursue entrapment, and thus did not show his guilty plea was involuntary.
- The court held McDonald also failed to show ineffective assistance or prejudice from counsel’s failure to object to parole and good-time references during punishment.

## Legal Principles

- Ineffective assistance requires proof of (1) deficient performance under prevailing professional norms and (2) prejudice—a reasonable probability of a different result.
- On direct appeal, ineffective-assistance claims must be firmly grounded in the record; a silent or undeveloped record generally cannot overcome the presumption that counsel acted reasonably.
- When the conviction rests on a guilty plea, prejudice requires a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the defendant would have rejected the plea and insisted on trial.
- A failure to object during punishment may reflect reasonable trial strategy; without record support explaining counsel’s reasoning, deficiency will not be presumed.
- To show prejudice at punishment, the defendant must demonstrate a reasonable probability the sentence would have been less severe absent the alleged error; the existence of standard parole instructions and strong evidence can weaken such a showing.

## Conclusion

The court upheld McDonald’s guilty-plea conviction and 40-year sentence because the appellate record did not affirmatively establish that counsel’s performance was deficient or that any alleged errors—whether related to an entrapment theory or parole/good-time references—likely changed McDonald’s plea decision or the punishment assessed.


McDonald v. State, No. 02-14-00113-CR, 2015 WL 1407832 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Mar. 26, 2015)