Gary Hawkins v. State of Tennessee, W2016-00723-CCA-R3-PC

Gary Hawkins was convicted by a Shelby County jury of first-degree felony murder (in perpetration of aggravated child neglect) and aggravated child neglect for the death of 18‑month‑old S.I.; life sentence for murder and concurrent 22 years for neglect.
Autopsy showed multiple recent blunt‑force injuries, internal hemorrhaging, torn small intestine, and bruising; medical examiner ruled the death a homicide.
At trial the victim’s mother (co‑defendant) testified, unexpectedly, about an incident where the child touched Hawkins’ genitals and Hawkins said it "felt good to him." Trial counsel did not object and instead cross‑examined her.
During closing, the State made several strong statements (e.g., "[Hawkins] is guilty. There's no question about that" and described Hawkins as a "cold blooded guy" who would punch a little girl). Trial counsel did not object to these remarks at trial.
Hawkins appealed and later petitioned for post‑conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object to (1) the prior‑bad‑act testimony and (2) the State’s closing remarks, and argued cumulative error.
The post‑conviction court denied relief, finding trial counsel’s choices were strategic; this Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.

Issue	Hawkins' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Failure to object to co‑defendant’s testimony about sexualized contact	Testimony was irrelevant and highly prejudicial; counsel deficient for not objecting	Counsel made an informed tactical choice to avoid drawing attention and to impeach witness on cross	Affirmed: counsel’s decision was strategic, not deficient; no prejudice shown
Failure to object to State's closing remarks ("he is guilty")	Statements improperly disparaged character and prejudiced the jury; counsel ineffective for non‑objection	Counsel reasonably declined to object; many comments are within leeway given closing arguments	Affirmed: trial counsel’s non‑objection was strategic; no deficient performance proven
Failure to object to inflammatory characterization ("cold blooded guy" who punched a little girl)	Remark improperly denigrated Hawkins’ character and invoked passion; counsel should have objected	No record explanation proves counsel was deficient; assume tactical decision absent testimony to contrary	Affirmed: petitioner failed to meet burden to show counsel deficient
Cumulative error	Combined failures undermined trial fairness and could change outcome	Cumulative‑error doctrine requires more than isolated, non‑errors; Hawkins showed no individual deficient performance	Affirmed: no cumulative error because no individual constitutional errors proved

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Vaughn v. State, 202 S.W.3d 106 (Tenn. 2006) (post‑conviction standards for ineffective assistance and review)
Henley v. State, 960 S.W.2d 572 (Tenn. 1997) (deference to tactical decisions; avoid 20/20 hindsight)
State v. Burns, 6 S.W.3d 453 (Tenn. 1999) (strong presumption counsel’s conduct was reasonable)
Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363 (Tenn. 1996) (deficiency and prejudice elements; appellate treatment)
Terry v. State, 46 S.W.3d 147 (Tenn. 2001) (closing argument is afforded considerable leeway)
Russell v. State, 532 S.W.2d 268 (Tenn. 1976) (limits on closing argument: must be temperate and evidence‑based)
State v. Sexton, 386 S.W.3d 371 (Tenn. 2012) (absence of counsel testimony about tactical choices supports presumption of valid strategy)
State v. Hester, 324 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010) (cumulative‑error doctrine applies only where multiple actual errors exist)