Sorry for this seemingly stupid question, but I am writing an appeal in which one of the points of error alleges that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

I know that the courts of appeal look at JNOV requests on appeal the same as legal sufficiency challenges, but is there even such a thing as a JNOV in criminal cases? Does anyone know of a case where that is addressed so that I can just quickly shut down the point of error? Thanks for any help!

The CCA has held that there is no such thing as a JNOV in criminal cases. The case might be Strange or Strong but it should be easy to find.

I found the case. State v. Savage, 933 S.W.2d 497 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).

Way to go. That should shut them down.

I had the same issue on appeal - still pending in the 11th COA. However, it was one were the court actually granted JNOV and we appealed.
State v. Savage was the primary case I relied on, the only problem I ran into was the CCA stated that the reviewing court may look beyond the label assigned and treat it as a motion for new trial. Savage at 499. So I had to end up arguing it as a legal sufficiency challenge as if it were a MNT.

Of course, the content of a document not its label controls what follows. Unless your trial court has only criminal jurisdiction, though, I would think you have an excellent argument that it knows the difference between a JNOV and a MNT and it should be held to its labeling.
Even though you can appeal either ruling you are in a vastly stronger position if you can convince the COA it was a JNOV. Good luck with that one.

This is literally the sentence that appellate counsel used in their brief:

"[Trial counsel] failed to request a judgment notwithstanding the verdict."

That's it. No argument, no citations. I think that the COA can treat that as a sufficiency challenege, but since that challenge is actually point of error number two, the COA should just shut him down on the JNOV argument.

[This message was edited by Danny Smith on 07-19-06 at .]

Without anything but that statement even the Waco court should be able to get it right. Is Bryan Baker still sporting his incognito look (the goatee)?

Yes, indeed, Brian is still sporting the goatee.