Willis v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Willis’s convictions, holding that the evidence was sufficient, that the omitted accomplice-corroboration instruction did not constitute plain error, and that none of his ineffective-assistance claims warranted relief. The court concluded that strong eyewitness, cell-phone, and circumstantial evidence supported the verdicts, and that the challenged exhibit and omitted limiting instruction did not prejudice Willis. It also held that counsel was not deficient for failing to challenge the cell-phone warrant because the warrant application established probable cause through a named informant’s statement against penal interest and other corroborating facts.