Pre-Trial Failures

1. Late evidence disclosure: The State disclosed alleged Facebook message screenshots from four years prior only six days before trial, despite three discovery requests from defense over those four years, leaving no time for verification. Defense counsel did not seek a continuance, forensic analysis, or metadata to authenticate the messages.
    

2. Suppressed disclosure: Despite three discovery requests over four years specifically for any prior police contact with complainant, the State did not disclose anything despite constructive possession of multiple impeaching reports on complainant, including being involved in a homicide investigation along with her roommate, a viable alternate suspect. 
    

3. Prior conviction left unchallenged: A 20-year-old, non-violent, judicially exempt conviction was not properly objected to by defense counsel and was then used to intimidate Edward to not take the stand and testify in his own defense.
    

4. Alternate suspect ignored: Counsel failed to investigate or present evidence of Geoffrey Jackson, a viable alternate suspect with a violent history, long-term relationship living with the complainant, with clear motive and opportunity to have committed the assault.
    

Trial Errors

1. Unauthenticated digital evidence admitted: Disputed Facebook screenshots were shown to the jury with no metadata, deletion or timestamp logs, or proof of authorship.
    

2. Burden shifted to the defense: The records reflects that the court stated eight times that Edward should have produced the messages himself to dispute their authenticity, despite the State’s duty to authenticate and the fact that Edward couldn't produce messages he didn't write and/or were not retrievable. 
    

3. Key impeachment evidence unused: Counsel failed to confront credibility issues and material contradictions between the complainant’s claimed facial injuries and photographs showing no visible injury, as well as inconsistencies among witness accounts. The complainant falsely testified that her roommate’s criminal history was from the "distant past", despite knowing he was an alternate suspect who was actively on probation for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and engaged in ongoing drug distribution at the time.
    

4. Police investigation not challenged by counsel: The officer testified falsely that he did not know where Edward lived and that he obtained Edward’s phone number from the complainant (which was never verified). In fact, both Edward’s address and correct phone number were already documented in the officer’s own police report. The officer conducted no independent investigation and relied solely on a single phone call with the complainant—confirming only her allegations. Her uncorroborated statement was the entirety of the asserted probable cause. Defense counsel never challenged these failures.
    

5. Edward did not testify: Because the prior conviction was left unchallenged, Edward was advised not to testify, depriving the jury of critical firsthand evidence. As a result, the jury never heard Edward’s account of the complainant’s and Geoff Jackson’s cover-up of the 2019 shooting incident; his eyewitness testimony that he saw Geoff Jackson yell at and physically manhandle the complainant; or his testimony that both were actively engaged in drug dealing and heavy alcohol use.
    

Sentencing Errors

1. Misleading prior-offense narrative: The State showed the jury the prior offense conviction without the judicial exemption and non-violent finding, leading them to believe Edward was a repeated violent offender.
    

2. Mitigation testimony constrained: Defense counsel instructed Edward’s wife and mother to “support the verdict” and not contradict the State’s narrative, even where it conflicted with their true beliefs and firsthand knowledge.
    

3. Aggravation narrative reinforced: Defense counsel instructed Edward’s wife and mother—witnesses meant to testify at sentencing in support of Edward—to testify that they agreed with the verdict and accepted the claim that Edward had ruined the complainant’s life, instead of allowing them to tell the truth: that the jury never heard half the story and they believed him innocent.
    

Appeal Errors by Appellate Counsel

1. Missed a major contradiction: On appeal, the State said the Facebook messages were not important and that the case stood without them. The appellate court affirmed the conviction by saying the opposite—that the messages were crucial because there were no eyewitnesses.
    

2. Conviction upheld on an argument the State never made: The court relied on a theory the prosecution itself rejected, so the defense never had a chance to challenge the reasoning that actually decided the case.
    

3. No rehearing requested: Appellate counsel failed to ask for rehearing to point out this error, losing the only opportunity to correct it.

4. Ignored unconstitutional burden shifting: At trial, the court repeatedly suggested the defense had to prove the messages were altered, improperly shifting the burden of authentication from the State to the defense.
    

5. Failed to raise the constitutional issue on appeal: Although counsel objected to the evidence, he did not argue that the burden shifting violated due process, forfeiting a stronger claim that could have changed the outcome.