Ingram v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Ingram’s convictions, holding that none of his ineffective-assistance claims established the prejudice required for relief. Even assuming deficient performance concerning victim-character evidence, an unredacted reference to juvenile history, and the description of a first-offender sentence as a conviction, the strong evidence of guilt showed no reasonable probability of a different result. The court likewise rejected Ingram’s cumulative-error claim because the combined alleged deficiencies did not cause actual prejudice.