Chante Mallard, who hit a man while driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, who was impaled in her windshield and left to die, was found guilty of murder today by a Texas jury, which deliberated under one hour. The jury will now consider what her sentence should be. In Texas, juries can determine sentences. Think of it as the punishment phase of a capital case, where after finding guilt, a second trial begins to determine if the defendant should live or die. Only in this case, the jury will be deciding between life in prison or a lesser term of years.

We've read and heard a lot of criticism of the defense team in the past day--suggestions that they should have put Mallard on the witness stand in the guilt phase or called more witnesses. (The defense called one witness, an expert, and then rested.) We disagree. The defense, correctly believing that the facts of the case were so ugly that their client would undoubtedly be convicted, has saved her testimony and their witnesses for the punishment phase.

The jury can sentence Mallard to between 2 and 10 years for the evidence tampering charge she pleaded guilty to last week. It can sentence her up to life on the murder charge. We think the defense will put on some strong mitigation evidence and persuade the jurors not to give this young woman life in prison.

We're scheduled to debate the trial issues and defense strategy with Marcia Clark on Hannity and Colmes around 9:30 EST tonight.