Suggs v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Suggs's convictions and sentences, holding that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient and rejecting his challenges to voir dire, the State's peremptory strike, an audio recording, photographs, jury communications, and counsel's effectiveness. The court concluded that the voir-dire procedure was permitted, the strike explanation was race-neutral, the recording was lawfully obtained by a conversation participant, and the remaining claims were waived, inadequately presented, or unsupported. The ineffective-assistance claims failed because Suggs did not establish deficient performance or prejudice.