Simmons v. State
Annotate this CaseAppellant appealed his murder conviction, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict and that his trial counsel was ineffective. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to authorize a rational jury to find appellant guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also held that trial counsel was not ineffective and rejected appellant's contention that counsel insufficiently disputed that the attack proximately caused the victim's death; counsel gave appellant bad advice about the risks of testifying at trial; counsel should have called a certain witness; counsel did not prepare adequately to impeach certain testimony; and counsel failed to request a jury charge on the defense of abandonment. 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.