Whether the State presented sufficient evidence to convict under Jackson v. Virginia

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This is a principal to second degree robbery case based, almost exclusively, on questionable circumstantial evidence that ended in a life sentence for Aaron Orlando Richards and leads to the following questions: 1. The State’s evidence, presented at trial, established that a male perpetrator attacked and robbed the victim. The entire ordeal was captured by a security camera. The video exclusively proves Richards was not the perpetrator. The video also, as the State conceded, disproved the theory of anyone acting as a lookout for the perpetrator: A. Did the State, according to the standard announced in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 8.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) present sufficient evidence to convict in this case? B. Did the State prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Richards acted as a lookout for an alleged accomplice? C. Was the jury’s decision to convict a rational decision? 2. Richards’s trial counsel, who has since been disbarred, rendered ineffective assistance contrary to the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Counsel had several issues transpiring in his life that caused his performance to be constitutionally deficient: A. Did Richards’s trial counsel render ineffective assistance when he failed to file a Motion for Bill of Particulars and Notice? B. Did Richards’s trial counsel render ineffective assistance when he failed to file a motion to suppress an alleged inculpatory statement? C. Did Richards’s trial counsel render ineffective assistance when he failed to present a defense and meaningfully challenge the prosecution’s case? ii