Zayas v. State

Summary

The court affirmed convictions for malice murder and a related firearm offense, holding that the circumstantial evidence authorized the jury to reject the defendant’s accidental-shooting hypothesis. It also held that counsel was not constitutionally ineffective for declining to seek suppression of pre-warning police-station statements because admitting them was a reasonable strategy that allowed the defense to present the defendant’s account without his testimony. The court further held that any errors in the involuntary-manslaughter instructions, and any related deficiencies by counsel, did not prejudice the defendant because the instructions did not prevent consideration of that offense and the evidence of guilt was substantial.