WALTER SCHNEIDER, APPELLANT,

v.

BEVERLY JEAN SCHNEIDER, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Markeria Roshawn Hillsman v. State, 159 So. 3d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
  …issues where those attitudes are “essential to a determination of whether challenges for cause or peremptory challenges are to be made.... ” Walker v. State, 724 So. 2d 1232, 1233 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (citation omitted). See also Ingrassia v. State, 902 So. 2d 357, 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (“[A] court may not preclude a party from inquiry into bias bearing on a matter that is at thé heart of the defendant’s case.”). Here, the trial court restricted defense counsel’s examination as to the prospective jurors’ a…
• Baccari v. State, 145 So. 3d 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
  …se counsel accepted the panel just a few transcript pages after the court asked if there was any other business that needed to be addressed.” Id. The Third District found the issue was preserved for appellate review. Id. See also Ingrassia v. State, 902 So. 2d 357, 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (finding the defendant’s objection preserved because before the jury was impaneled, “the trial court specifically and repeatedly reassured counsel, in the course of the extensive colloquy, that the issue was on the record an…
• Wicks v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc., 908 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
  …n was abandoned and the issue not preserved for appellate review. The subsequent day’s efforts were ineffective to preserve this issue. Objections must be timely. This case does not fall within the narrow exception to Joiner. In Ingrassia v. State, 902 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), the court considered the State’s contention that the jury issue was not preserved because it was not explicitly renewed at the time the jury was empanelled. Noting that the trial court “specifically and re [*1193] peatedly reass…

Authorities Cited

• LYN v. LYN, 884 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)