Hill v. State

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of Hill’s habeas petition because he failed to show that the convictions were facially invalid or that the trial courts lacked jurisdiction. His actual-innocence claim was procedurally improper because he did not proceed under the statutory actual-innocence procedure or file in the courts where the convictions were entered, and his remaining claims alleged trial error not cognizable in habeas proceedings. The court also declined to consider his ineffective-assistance claim because it was raised for the first time on appeal.