Angelo Johnson, Appellant, v. The State of Florida, Appellee. (2024)

Affirmed. See Cooper v. State, 712 So. 2d 1216, 1217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), rev. denied, 720 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 1998) (“A suggestion that the defendant suborned perjury or that a defense witness manufactured evidence, without a foundation in the record, is completely improper.”); see also Calloway v. State, 210 So. 3d 1160, 1182 (Fla. 2017) (“[E]xperts may not comment on the credibility of other witnesses. This limitation is intended to minimize any effect that the expert status of the witness may have on the jury's reception of the testimony.”) (internal citations omitted); White v. State, 964 So. 2d 1278, 1286 (Fla. 2007) (“A defendant cannot establish ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel's failure to call a witness who is unavailable.”); Jacobson v. Humana Med. Plan, Inc., 636 So. 2d 120, 121 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (“[T]he doctrine of the ‘law of the case[ ]’ ․ is that those points of law adjudicated in a former appeal are binding in order to promote stability of judicial decisions and to avoid piecemeal litigation.”); Deparvine v. State, 146 So. 3d 1071, 1088, 1095–96 (Fla. 2014) (finding trial counsel's failure to develop evidence and cross-examine witness on issue did not “demonstrate deficient performance or prejudice” and was not ineffective because testimony would have little substance on outcome of case).

PER CURIAM.