WOOD COUNTY, Texas (KETK) An East Texas man convicted of shooting a DPS Trooper in the face back in 2010 had his sentence reduced earlier this month.
Timothy Parmer, 56, will now serve only 20 years in prison instead of the life sentence he was originally handed down for his charge of attempted capital murder of a peace officer.
According to Wood County D.A. Angela Albers, the Sixth Court of Appeals returned the sentence due to ineffective council by the defense for several reasons.
Parmer was presented with an ammended plea on September 9 of this year to serve 20 years behind bars. The victim did not want to go to trial again and supported the new sentence.
In March 2020, Parmer was wanted on aggravated assault with a deadly weapon charges after allegedly threatening his common-law wife with a hatchet.
She also notified law enforcement Parmer was “acting strangely and shooting a gun.” When authorities went to his residence to serve an arrest warrant, a Wood County deputy stated Parmer “wasn’t making any sense whatsoever.”
Officers decided to cut the electric power to Parmer’s home.
Trooper Larry Vaughan testified he heard two people emerge from the residence after the power was turned off. Officers attempted to tase Parmer, but caught his common-law wife instead.
Parmer yelled, “Get the f*** off my property,” ran back inside of his home, grabbed a shotgun and chambered a shell.
In order to see into the property, Trooper Vaughan shined his flashlight through a window. Parmer then shot Trooper Vaughan in the face with buckshot.
Vaughan underwent surgery and was able to recover from the injury.
At trial in 2017, Parmer argued he did not intentionally or knowingly attempt to cause Vaughan’s death. Instead, he argued he only intended to get people off of his property when he shot his weapon.
Prior to the trial, Parmer’s defense counsel stipulated to the admission of Parmer’s medical records. Those records described Parmer’s long history of mental illness. However, the records also contained many detailed references to extraneous offenses, prior bad acts and unpopular views. Yet, Parmer failed to request an extraneous-offense instruction for any offenses that may have been admissible.
The Sixth Court of Appeals found Parmer’s counsel’s failure to object to the admission of inadmissible extraneous-offense testimony, which the jury was allowed to impermissibly use as direct evidence of intent and of his guilt, created a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the jury’s finding that Parmer intentionally or knowingly attempted to cause Vaughan’s death.
“We reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand this case for a new trial,” Justice Bailey C. Moseley wrote in the court’s opinion.