In Davis v. State, 928 So. 2d 1089, 1117 (Fla. 2005), the defendant alleged trial counsel was ineffective during voir dire because trial counsel did not have a reasonable basis to stipulate to the removal for cause of eleven potential jurors. Davis asserted that if counsel had "followed up" during voir dire with more specific questions and had effectively rehabilitated the jurors, there would not have been a basis for any for-cause challenges. Davis, 928 So. 2d at 1118. This Court found these allegations to be "mere conjecture,". Id.