Ward v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Ward’s convictions arising from two shootings, holding that the evidence did not support a voluntary-manslaughter instruction, was constitutionally sufficient to support the convictions related to the second shooting, and did not produce impermissible repugnant verdicts. The court also rejected Ward’s ineffective-assistance claim because evidence of the victim’s prior firearm possession would not have been admissible to establish violent character or Ward’s state of mind, and counsel therefore was not deficient. The court noted, but did not decide, whether prior repugnant-verdict precedent remains valid after intervening federal precedent.