Javarus Morgan v. State of Florida

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: July 2, 2025
• Docket: 3D2024-1862
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed July 2, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-1862 Lower Tribunal No. F01-21587B ________________

Javarus Morgan, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Laura Shearon Cruz, Judge.

Javarus Morgan, in proper person.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Henry v. State, 948 So. 2d 609, 621 (Fla. 2006)

(“Strickland requires defendants to show ‘there is a reasonable probability

that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding

would have been different.’ . . . [A] ‘reasonable probability’ is a ‘probability

sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.’” (quoting Strickland v.

Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 (1984))); see also Hurst v. State, 18 So. 3d

975, 996 (Fla. 2009) (“The Court need not reach both Strickland prongs in

every case. ‘[W]hen a defendant fails to make a showing as to one prong, it

is not necessary to delve into whether he has made a showing as to the other

prong.’” (quoting Preston v. State, 970 So. 2d 789, 803 (Fla. 2007))); State

v. Larzelere, 979 So. 2d 195, 211 (Fla. 2008) (“Larzelere has not shown

counsel to be ineffective for not calling a concrete expert because she had

not demonstrated what an individual qualified as a concrete expert would

have testified to in this case or how such testimony would cast doubt on her

guilt.”); Connor v. State, 979 So. 2d 852, 863 (Fla. 2007) (“Relief on

ineffective assistance of counsel claims must be based on more than

speculation and conjecture.”).