Brown v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Brown's convictions, rejecting his claims that trial counsel was ineffective and that the trial court improperly commented on the evidence. It held that counsel's challenged decisions were either objectively reasonable trial strategy or involved objections that likely would have been overruled, and that the trial court's explanation of redactions was procedural rather than an opinion on the evidence. The court nevertheless vacated the judgment in part because the trial court improperly merged the aggravated-assault and marijuana-sale counts and remanded for correction of the sentence.