YOUNG v. SCOTT

1
JAVONTE ODARIOU YOUNG,
Petitioner,
v. 	Case No. 1:25-cv-26-AW-HTC
CHAD SCOTT, et al.,
Respondents.
_______________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner Javonte Young sought § 2241 relief based on his claim of excessive
bond. ECF No. 1. After careful consideration and a de novo review, I now adopt the
magistrate judge s report and recommendation (ECF No. 12) and incorporate it into
this order. I conclude, as did the magistrate judge, that Younger abstention applies.
The state court held multiple hearings and maintained a $300,000 bond. The
First DCA denied Young s petition for relief. The magistrate judge explained some
of the procedural history as background. In his objections, Young takes issue with
some of the magistrate judge s conclusions in doing so. For example, Young says
the magistrate judge wrongly suggested he was on probation. ECF No. 13 at 4. But
even if correct, this is beside the point. Because Younger abstention applies, we do
not review the correctness of the state court s bond decision.
As to Younger itself, Petitioner does not dispute the existence of an ongoing
state judicial proceeding that implicates important state interests. He does not offer
Case 1:25-cv-00026-AW-HTC Document 14 Filed 12/24/25 Page 1 of 2

2
any meaningful argument regarding any exception to Younger. Instead, he argues
that because the First DCA took too long to review the state trial court s decision, it
effectively lost jurisdiction of the matter, which by then lay exclusively in federal
court. ECF No. 13 at 2-3. And, he argues, this means 	[t]he opinion of the First
District Court of Appeal is null and void and must be vacated. 	Id. at 3.
After a de novo review, I overrule all objections. The clerk will enter a
based on Younger
abstention
SO ORDERED on December 24, 2025.
s/ Allen Winsor
Chief United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-00026-AW-HTC Document 14 Filed 12/24/25 Page 2 of 2