Victorino v. State
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of six counts of first-degree murder and one count each of abuse to a dead human body, armed burglary of a dwelling, conspiracy, and cruelty to an animal. The trial court imposed four death sentences, two life sentences, and additional terms for the noncapital crimes. Defendant subsequently filed a motion to vacate his convictions, which the postconviction court denied. Defendant appealed and petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, contending that his appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance. The Supreme Court affirmed the postconviction court's denial of Defendant's motion for postconviction and denied habeas corpus relief, holding (1) the postconviction court did not err in denying (i) thirteen of Defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, as Defendant did not demonstrate that he was prejudiced by any error made by trial counsel, and (ii) Defendant's claim that his death sentences were unconstitutional under Ring v. Arizona, as Defendant's claim based on Ring was procedurally barred and without merit; and (2) Defendant's habeas claim 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.