OCALA, FL (352today.com) – A man in state custody who robbed an Internet cafe in Summerfield more than seven years ago will remain incarcerated for the rest of his life.
Crenshaw vs. Secretary Department of Corrections Marion County, United States District Court Middle District of Florida.
Joseph Andrew Crenshaw’s amended petition for writ of habeas corpus, a procedure for obtaining a judicial determination of the legality of an individual’s custody, , was denied and dismissed with prejudice on Aug. 20, 2025.
What does that mean? It means that the case is permanently closed and can’t be brought back to court.
Crenshaw is a Florida prison rereleasee offender, which means he committed a qualifying offense within three years of being released from prison, a violent felony, in this case while committing a robbery with a firearm while wearing a mask and being a felon in possession of a firearm while wearing a mask. Crenshaw robbed the Lucky Panda Internet Cafe in Summerfield, on June 4, 2018, a $2,500 mistake that would have grave consequences.
However, Crenshaw challenged his 2021 convictions, concurrent life and 15-year prison sentences, raising two grounds for relief, that his counsel was ineffective, failing to object to the trial court’s acceptance of a prosecution witness as an expert, and for failing to move to a mistrial for the same reason. His convictions became final on July 28, 2022. On March 13, 2023, Crenshaw filed a motion for post-conviction relief.
A mistrial is a trial terminated and declared void prior to the return of a verdict.
During the trial the state had called a Florida Department of Law Enforcement crime laboratory analyst as a witness and established her credentials. The jury was given a standard instruction regarding expert witnesses.
The trial was held June 2 and June 3, 2021. Crenshaw would eventually be sentenced to life in prison with a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years on the first count and 15 years in state prison with a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years on the second count.
Crenshaw appealed his convictions and sentence in a timely fashion, filing a motion for post-conviction relief on March 13, 2023. However, on April 6, 2023, the trial court denied his claim.
Later that fall, on Nov. 21, 2023, the Fifth District Court of Appeal per curium, an opinion by the court which expresses its decision in the case but whose author isn’t identified, affirmed the trial court’s denial of the post-conviction relief and the mandate issued on, Dec. 15, 2023.
Undeterred, Crenshaw on Feb. 16, 2024, sought certiorari review, a legal process where a higher court reviews the decision of a lower court, with the Supreme Court of the United States. On April 15, of the same year, the Supreme Court denied Crenshaw’s petition.
The amended petition was filed in a timely fashion, but was ultimately denied, because it was insufficiently pleaded, Crenshaw failed to plead how counsel was ineffective, and the petition also failed on its merits as Crenshaw’s allegations of deficient performance of trial counsel, claiming that she had failed to move for a mistrial, based on the tendering and acceptance of the expert witness, were refuted by the record.