Stripling v. the State. Brewer v. the State.

Summary

The court affirmed both convictions. It held that the evidence was sufficient to establish Brewer’s participation in criminal street gang activity and that the trial court did not plainly err by omitting an accomplice-corroboration instruction because the identified witnesses were not shown to be Stripling’s accomplices. The court also rejected Brewer’s ineffective-assistance claim, finding that counsel’s decision not to call an AirDroid expert was reasonable trial strategy and that the expert could not establish that Brewer actually used the application to send the relevant messages.