Markeita Davis v. The State of Florida

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: May 8, 2024
• Docket: 2022-2035
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed May 8, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-2035 Lower Tribunal No. F15-9216 ________________

Markeita Davis, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Cristina Maria Miranda, Judge.

Markeita Davis, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Magaly Rodriguez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984)

(setting forth the two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel requiring

a showing of material errors and that such deficient performance prejudiced

the defense amounting to a deprivation of the right to a fair trial); Alcorn v.

State, 121 So. 3d 419, 422 (Fla. 2013) (“[T]o show prejudice, the defendant

must demonstrate a reasonable probability, defined as a probability sufficient

to undermine confidence in the outcome, that (1) he or she would have

accepted the [plea] offer had counsel advised the defendant correctly, (2)

the prosecutor would not have withdrawn the offer, (3) the court would have

accepted the offer, and (4) the conviction or sentence, or both, under the

offer's terms would have been less severe than under the judgment and

sentence that in fact were imposed.”); Blanco v. State, 702 So. 2d 1250,

1252 (Fla. 1997) (explaining that in reviewing findings after an evidentiary

hearing “this Court will not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court on

questions of fact, likewise of the credibility of the witnesses as well as the

weight to be given to the evidence by the trial court” (quotations omitted)).