Martin v. the State (two Cases)

Summary

The court affirmed both defendants’ convictions for malice murder and aggravated assault. It held that the evidence was sufficient to support their convictions, the trial court properly denied a mistrial, the jury instructions did not constitute plain error, and the evidentiary challenge was not reviewable or harmless. The court also rejected the ineffective-assistance claims because counsel’s challenged decisions were reasonable strategic choices and did not establish deficient performance or prejudice.