Singleton v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of several drug-related sentences. The conviction was affirmed on appeal. Appellant subsequently filed a pro se petition for postconviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court denied the petition without a hearing. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court did not err in not holding an evidentiary hearing on Appellant's petition; (2) the trial court did not err in failing to grant Appellant's petition based on his argument that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by deciding not to call a certain witness; and (3) Appellant's third argument on appeal was without merit.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.