Sauder v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Sauder's convictions for malice murder, armed robbery, and related offenses because the evidence was constitutionally and statutorily sufficient, the evidentiary and instructional challenges did not warrant relief, and the alleged Brady violations and ineffective-assistance claims did not establish prejudice. The court nevertheless vacated the conviction and sentence for possessing a firearm during the commission of aggravated assault because that count should have merged with the firearm-possession count predicated on malice murder. The court also concluded that the alleged errors, considered cumulatively, did not create a reasonable probability of a different result.