Lavon Shinn v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

── Lavon Shinn v. Secretary, Department of Corrections ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: June 03, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 24-12355 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 06/03/2026 Page: 1 of 8 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-12355 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ LAVON R. SHINN, Petitioner-Appellant, versus SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondents-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 6:22-cv-00956-RBD-RMN ____________________ Before ROSENBAUM, ABUDU, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Lavon Shinn is a Florida prisoner serving a total life sentence for second-degree murder, aggravated battery with a firearm, and USCA11 Case: 24-12355 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 06/03/2026 Page: 2 of 8 2 Opinion of the Court 24-12355 shooting from a vehicle. In 2022, Shinn filed a federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He alleged, among other claims, that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise on direct appeal the issue of whether the State established “the corpus delicti for the crimes of which [he] was convicted.” The district court denied this claim, and we granted a certificate of ap- pealability (“COA”) to review that ruling. After careful review, we affirm the denial of Shinn’s § 2254 petition. I. These are the relevant facts. Shinn was convicted by a Flor- ida jury of participating in a drive-by shooting on the night of April 16, 2016, which killed two people and injured four others. On di- rect appeal, a Florida appellate court affirmed his convictions for two counts of second-degree murder, four counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, and one count of shooting from a vehicle. Shinn filed a pro se habeas petition in state court, arguing, as relevant here, that his “[a]ppellate [c]ounsel was [i]neffective for failing to raise the issue of the State not establishing the [c]orpus [d]elicti for the crimes of which he was convicted.” He argued that the State failed to establish a chain of custody for the bodies of the two deceased victims, so it failed to prove that anyone died. He also asserted that the State failed to produce evidence that the other victims had been shot or were injured in any way. And he con- tended that the State failed to establish a chain of custody for the .40 caliber Glock handgun allegedly used in the offense or the pro- jectiles found at the scene, among other evidentiary deficiencies. USCA11 Case: 24-12355 Document: 44-1 Date Filed: 06/03/2026 Page: 3 of 8 24-12355 Opinion of the Court 3 The State responded that (1) Shinn failed to sufficiently plead his corpus delicti claim because his allegations were merely conclu- sory; (2) appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise a claim that was not preserved for appeal; and (3) his corpus delicti argument was without merit. The state appellate court issued an order denying Shinn’s petition “on the merits” without further analysis. Shinn then fil