A Houston Court of Appeals on April 24 held that attempted 3g offenses fall under the 3g laws that make a defendant ineligible for probation and, presumably, ineligible for early parole. See the 3g opinion.

Do you think this is correct?

How many of you have been pleading a case as an attempt to avoid these consequences?

I disagreed with the Parfait decision upon which this case was based, and I can foresee some potetntially serious consequences if this twisted logic becomes "the law."

In particular, any defense lawyer who is involved in a plea agreement of this type - trying to avoid 3g consequences either for purposes of obtaining "regular" probation, or for parole considerations - will inform his or her client that the "attempt" element removes the offense from the purview of 3g.

Down the road, when the client is hammered with 3g by the State or the Parole Board, and he or she files an 11.07 writ (or a challenge to the State's motion to revoke), the ineffective assistance claim may be valid, which could lead to the undoing of hundreds of pleas/convictions.

I know that in the future, I'll be looking very carefully at any clients I represent in probation revocation hearings for "3g" offenses.