Holmes v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Holmes’s convictions and life-without-parole sentence. It held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to reject Holmes’s self-defense claim, that an unobjected-to jury instruction about his out-of-court statements did not constitute plain error, and that the Eighth Amendment did not require an on-the-record finding of permanent incorrigibility or an express discussion of youth where the record showed that the sentencing court considered the relevant factors.