Brock v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Brock’s convictions, concluding that any error in admitting evidence of his prior assault on Minkema, or in failing to strike her testimony when it differed from the State’s pretrial proffer, was harmless because the evidence of Brock’s guilt was strong and independently corroborated. The court also held that Brock’s ineffective-assistance claim was not preserved because new counsel failed to raise it at the motion-for-new-trial stage.