Mitchell v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Mitchell’s convictions, rejecting his claims that trial counsel was ineffective regarding detective testimony and allegedly undisclosed fingerprint information. Counsel adequately objected to the detective’s purported expert testimony, and Mitchell failed to show a material Brady violation because his theory of prejudice was speculative and the jury heard that no fingerprints were matched to anyone. The court also held that the trial court properly admitted the autopsy photograph because it helped explain the gunshot trajectory and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.