Jones v. State

In sum, I agree with this affirmance on appeal of the trial court’s conclusion of law that appellant Jones was not denied effective assistance of counsel and with the af-firmance of the judgment as a whole denying post-conviction relief. I cannot, however, agree at all with the majority wherein it approves the trial court’s conclusion of law that Final Instruction No. 18 was not erroneous. The trial court’s analysis, approved and quoted in the majority opinion, focuses upon the need for instructions to keep discrete elements of a crime separate and distinct. This abstraction falls short here.…