Ineffective assistance of counsel; Trial strategy; Counsel’s concession of defendant’s guilt; People v McCoy; Sufficiency of the evidence; First-degree murder; Premeditation & deliberation; People v Oros; Principle that a definite pause between gun shots is sufficient to allow a jury to infer that a defendant had time for the “second look” or reflection; People v Johnson; Consciousness of guilt; People v McGhee

The court held defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel, and the evidence was sufficient to support his first-degree murder convictions. He was convicted of first-degree premediated murder, FIP, possession with intent to deliver, and felony-firearm, second offense, for shooting and killing the two victims. On appeal, the court rejected his argument that defense counsel conceded that defendant was guilty of the charged crimes, violating both his right to client autonomy and to the effective assistance of counsel. “It is clear that defense counsel properly exercised his discretion to implement a strategy in which he argued that defendant was at most guilty of second-degree murder, rather than first-degree premeditated murder. Further, it bears repeating that defendant never asserted his innocence or expressed his disapproval of defense counsel’s concession of guilt.” Moreover, he “presented no evidence showing that defense counsel ignored a request to maintain his innocence, nor does he explain why defense counsel’s attempt to convince the jury to convict him of the lesser included offense of second-degree murder was not part of a sound trial strategy in this instance.” The court also rejected defendant’s claim that the prosecution presented insufficient evidence of premeditation to sustain his first-degree-murder convictions. He believed the victims “robbed him. He thus waited in the parking lot for them to appear, shot both of them, and sped off immediately after the shooting. A 911 call pertaining to the shooting recorded two groups of gunshots with a lull between them, suggesting that defendant shot at one victim first, paused, then aimed and shot at the other. All of these facts suggest that the killing was premeditated.” Affirmed.