Perryman-Henderson v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Perryman-Henderson's convictions and sentence, holding that trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective in cross-examining the medical examiner about the range of fire. The court also assumed without deciding that the trial judge's comment on that testimony was erroneous, but concluded that the unpreserved claim failed under plain-error review because Perryman-Henderson did not show that the comment affected his substantial rights. The court emphasized the eyewitness and other evidence that contradicted his account of an accidental shooting during a struggle.