Claude v. State
Claude v. State
Opinion of the Court
Jonas Claude appeals from a second degree murder conviction claiming (1) that two witnesses impermissibly commented on his constitutional right to remain silent; (2) that unduly prejudicial photographs of the murder victim were introduced into evidence; and, (3) that his trial attorney was ineffective for failing to file motions in limine to preclude testimony regarding prior unrelated criminal acts and to preclude introduction of various photographs.
We find no reversible error regarding the testimony adduced below concerning Claude’s waiver of his Miranda
Affirmed.
. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.