Weems v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Weems's convictions and sentences for two malice murders and firearm offenses. It held that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient and permitted the jury to reject the alternative-shooter hypothesis, that the trial court applied the correct standard when denying the motion for new trial on the general grounds, and that the remaining claims failed because remote testimony was properly denied and the judge's statement was not an improper comment on the evidence.