Williams v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Williams’s convictions, holding that trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective for declining further competency investigation or an insanity defense after counsel, a social worker, and a psychiatrist evaluated the matter and Williams maintained his innocence. The court also held that the trial court had no sua sponte duty to conduct a competency hearing because the record did not objectively raise a bona fide doubt about Williams’s ability to understand the proceedings or assist counsel. All participating justices concurred, with one justice not participating.