Brock v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Brock’s convictions, holding that the trial evidence was constitutionally sufficient for the jury to reject his self-defense theory. The Court held that the trial court’s denial of the general-grounds motion for new trial was not reviewable and that Brock’s challenge to the prosecutor’s closing argument was unpreserved because he failed to object. It also held that the jury-selection procedures complied with the governing statute and jury-composition rule and did not violate Brock’s constitutional rights.