Mitchell v. the State (two Cases)

Summary

The court affirmed the convictions of Mitchell and Dorsey for malice murder and related crimes. It held that Mitchell was not entitled to a new trial because the trial court properly exercised its discretion in weighing the evidence, the evidence was constitutionally sufficient, and the alleged juror alcohol consumption was an immaterial irregularity cured by corrective action. It also held that the evidence was sufficient to support Dorsey's convictions as a direct participant or party to the crimes.