ROBERTA GILLIAM, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Voir Dire Examination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse Gilliam’s conviction and remand for a new trial. The trial court erred in permitting the state to exercise a peremptory challenge against a black prospective juror where, as here, the record does not support the state’s reason for the challenge. A review of the voir dire examination of juror Slade does not reveal that she was predisposed to find defendant innocent of the charged crime. Instead, juror Slade’s response to defense counsel’s arguably unartful question reflects a correct statement of the law concerning the presumption of innocence. Because the court should not have permitted the challenge, defendant is entitled to a new trial. Williams v. State, 574 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 1991) (new trial ordered where record fails to support reason given for challenge).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carter v. State, 762 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…264, 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (following Floyd). Cf. Nunez v. State, 664 So. 2d 1109, 1111-12 (where defense requested review of prospective juror’s voir dire testimony, point was preserved for appellate review). Defendant relies on Gilliam v. State, 645 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), but Gilliam is silent on the preservation issue, and obviously the Floyd decision is controlling. Defendant next contends that his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted with respect to the offense of kidnappi…
-
Est. OF Gertie Mae Youngblood v. Halifax Convalescent Ctr., Ltd., 874 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…State, 791 So. 2d 557 (Fla.2d DCA 2001); Daniel v. State, 697 So. 2d 959 (1997). We can only conclude that the trial court erred in not ruling that the reasons given by Delta’s counsel to challenge Morris were pretextual. Fleming; Gilliam v. State, 645 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Reeves v. State, 632 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Even a single individual strike of an African-American prospective juror that is racially motivated is not permissible. State v. Johans, 613 So. 2d 1319 (Fla.1993); Hall; Slapp…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 574 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 1991)