Carter v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Carter's convictions, holding that the unrequested accomplice-corroboration instruction did not warrant plain-error relief and that counsel's failure to request it did not constitute ineffective assistance because substantial independent evidence corroborated the accomplice's testimony. The court also held that admission of the redacted Proof of Incarceration did not amount to plain error because its relevance and probative value were reasonably debatable and its admission was not clearly improper under the balancing rule.