Pyne v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Pyne’s convictions, holding that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to an alleged inconsistent-prosecution theory because no clearly established due-process objection applied to the circumstances. The court also held that the prosecutor’s closing remarks did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof or comment on Pyne’s decision not to testify, and therefore the trial court neither abused its discretion in overruling the objection nor needed to give a curative instruction.