AUSTIN, Texas -- After the attorney for a Baytown mother, convicted of killing her 2-month-old son, appealed for her release, the court announced Friday morning that her conviction would be overturned a second time, KPRC Local 2 reported.

The new opinion in the case of Brandy Briggs corrects clerical errors that had prompted the court to abruptly withdraw its original ruling.

The new ruling doesn't change the outcome and maintains that the conviction should be overturned because her lawyer did a poor job of representing her.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled 8-1 Wednesday to throw out Briggs' conviction, saying Richard Anderson did a poor job representing her, and also noted that despite her guilty plea, a jury probably would have acquitted her given the child's extensive history of severe medical problems.

After the opinion was issued, state District Judge Mary Lou Keel, who was Briggs' trial judge, wrote the appeals court that its opinion mistakenly quotes findings that did not come from her.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reinstated Briggs' conviction without explanation on Thursday.

In 2000, Briggs -- who was charged with murder in the 1999 death of her son, Daniel Lemons -- pleaded guilty to injury of a child on Anderson's advice. In her appeal, she claimed Anderson said she would be sentenced to probation instead of prison if she took the plea agreement.

"He told my daughter she would never see prison," Briggs' mother, Shelbia Goss, told KPRC Local 2.

---

Slideshow: Mother Convicted Of Killing Son To Stay In Prison

---

Briggs, now 24, accepted the plea agreement and was sentenced to 17 years behind bars.

On Thursday, KPRC Local 2 spoke exclusively with Anderson, who denies the accusation that he poorly represented his client.

"First time in 40 years that I've ever had a case of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel against me," Anderson told KPRC Local 2. "I'm very disappointed in it. It's got me to the point that I'm not real excited about the future practice of law."

There were two main parts of Briggs' appeal: that Anderson did a poor job and that she was innocent. The appeals court threw out the conviction Wednesday based on its finding about Anderson. The court denied her innocence claim, but in doing so made the mistakes referred to in her letter.

Criminal Appeals Court attorney Ed Marty acknowledged the mistake, which he described as a clerical error, and said Thursday that the court would reissue the opinion as soon as possible.

"It's important for this court to not make this kind of error, but we in fact did," Marty said.

Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Cathy Cochran, who wrote the opinion for the majority, took Keel's letter to the other judges, who then voted to recall the opinion.

"It was like the same day. It was like reliving that same day over and over again," Goss said.

Briggs' appeals attorney, Charles Portz, said his client was stunned by the withdrawal Thursday, which left her in prison.

"She was a basket case," Portz said.

Briggs' family retained Anderson and paid him $10,400 of his $15,000 fee. When they didn't pay the rest, he said he could not hire medical experts without an additional $2,500-$7,500. Briggs pleaded guilty without a deal with prosecutors.

"I would hope for that man to lose his license. He does not need to represent anybody because he ain't worth a flip," Briggs' grandmother, Charline McGinty, said.

Originally ruled a homicide, the Harris County medical examiner's office later changed the cause of death to "undetermined" because there was no blunt trauma or indication of child abuse.

The boy had extensive medical problems, including birth defects, multiple hospitalizations and bungled treatment just before he died.

The court said Anderson could have subpoenaed the doctors who treated Daniel, or he could have withdrawn to allow her to claim indigence and ask the court to pay for expert testimony.

Anderson told KPRC Local 2 that he considered withdrawing his services from the case.

"It's a shame that you put in the time and the effort you do, trying to do what you're supposed to do and do it right, to have it washed down the drain just at the swish of a broom for something that you don't feel like is deserving," Anderson said.

Anderson also could have reduced his fee and asked the court to pay for the witness, the court said.

An attorney representing an indigent defendant would be expected to investigate and request expert assistance. A privately retained attorney should be held to the same standard, the court said.