Payne v. State
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of murder and appealed his conviction, arguing that the evidence against him was insufficient, that the long delay in his appeal violated his due process rights, and that his trial counsel's performance and the trial court's self-defense jury instruction was inadequate. The court held that the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charges for which he was convicted. The court also held that the length of delay in this appeal was excessive but the delay did not violate defendant's due process rights because the Chatman v. Mancill factors all weighed against him. The court further held that it could not say that trial counsel's decision not to seek admission of other portions of defendant's statement had a reasonable probability of affecting the result of the trial and it could not conclude that trial counsel's decision not to cross-examine a government agent at issue was either deficient or prejudicial. The court finally held that the trial court did not give an inadequate jury instruction where there was no requirement that the trial court summarize for the jury all of the circumstances surrounding the shooting. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.
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.