## Facts

- One evening, Darrell Thompkins was watching television with two friends: the victim, Haaq, and Holmes.
- Thompkins and Haaq argued while Holmes was present.
- Holmes left the room during the argument and then heard a gunshot.
- Holmes returned and found Haaq had been shot in the head.
- Thompkins was upset and yelled that he did not mean to do it.
- Within minutes, Thompkins ran out of the house.
- Thompkins disposed of the gun in a nearby parking lot.
- Holmes called 911 and contacted Haaq’s family to report what happened.
- Haaq died from the gunshot wound, and Thompkins was charged with murder.
- At trial, Thompkins testified that he did not intend to shoot Haaq and that he unintentionally aimed the gun at Haaq’s head while holding it.
- The jury convicted Thompkins of murder, and he appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the jury’s finding that Thompkins acted intentionally or knowingly in causing Haaq’s death (as required for murder).
2. Whether Thompkins established ineffective assistance of counsel under *Strickland v. Washington* based on alleged errors by trial counsel and resulting prejudice.

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed the murder conviction.
- The court held the evidence was legally sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Thompkins acted intentionally or knowingly, despite his claim that the shooting was accidental.
- The court also held the evidence was factually sufficient; the proof of guilt was not so weak, nor so outweighed by contrary evidence, as to make the verdict clearly wrong or manifestly unjust.
- The court rejected the ineffective-assistance claim because the appellate record did not show why counsel acted as he did and did not establish deficient performance or a reasonable probability of a different outcome.

## Legal Principles

- Legal sufficiency in criminal cases asks whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational factfinder could have found the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Factual sufficiency review (as applied in Texas at the time) considers all the evidence in a neutral light and asks whether the evidence supporting the verdict is too weak, or whether contrary evidence so greatly outweighs supporting evidence, that the verdict is clearly wrong and unjust.
- Under Texas law, intent to kill, or knowledge that death is reasonably certain to result, may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon in a deadly manner, including firing a gun at a vital part of the body such as the head.
- The jury is the primary judge of credibility and weight; it may accept or reject a defendant’s claim that a shooting was accidental.
- Evidence of flight and disposing of a weapon may be considered by the factfinder as circumstantial evidence of consciousness of guilt.
- Ineffective assistance of counsel requires proof (1) that counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) that there is a reasonable probability the result would have been different without the errors.
- On direct appeal, a reviewing court generally will not infer deficient performance from a silent record and will not guess at counsel’s strategy; the defendant bears the burden to develop a record showing both deficiency and prejudice.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Thompkins’s murder conviction, holding that the jury could infer the required intent or knowledge from the circumstances of a gunshot to the victim’s head and related conduct, and that Thompkins’s ineffective-assistance claim failed because the appellate record did not establish unreasonable lawyering or a different probable result.


Thompkins v. State, 2000 WL 1421671 (2000)