Dana Williamson v. State of Florida

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Williamson’s postconviction motion, holding that he failed to establish prejudice from counsel’s alleged failures concerning the admission and presentation of Dr. Ofshe’s expert testimony. Even assuming deficient performance, the totality of the guilt and credibility evidence did not create a reasonable probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the verdict. PARIENTE, J., dissenting, would have found prejudice because the expert testimony improperly bolstered the State’s principal witness and undermined confidence in the guilt-phase verdict.