GERALD DOBLY MCCLOUD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
On remand from the Florida Supreme Court following Batson-type challenges to jury composition, the appellate court reconsidered whether the trial court properly allowed the state to use peremptory challenges to strike black jurors in two separate cases. The court affirmed one conviction where the state provided race-neutral reasons for its challenges that the trial judge found credible, but reversed the other where the state failed to provide any reasons for three of its peremptory challenges.
In Case No. 85-4591, the conviction is affirmed because the state carried its burden of providing race-neutral reasons for its peremptory challenges and the trial judge's acceptance of those reasons was not an abuse of discretion. In Case No. 85-4592, the conviction is reversed and remanded for new trial because the state failed to provide any reasons for three of its peremptory challenges, thereby failing to carry its burden.
[1] When a defendant alleges improper removal of a minority group member from a jury venire, any doubt regarding the defendant's initial burden should be resolved in the defe…
[2] Following a defendant's prima facie showing of improper jury selection, the state must provide neutral and reasonable explanations for its peremptory challenges that are…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“in cases in which a member of a distinct minority group allegedly has been removed improperly from a jury venire by the state, any doubt as to whether the complaining party has met its initial burden in challenging this practice should be resolved in that party's favor”
Establishes the standard from Slappy for evaluating challenges to jury composition based on race
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGerald McCloud, a black defendant, was tried in two separate cases more than a month apart. In both cases, the state used peremptory challenges to str…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Racial Discrimination In Jury Selection cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
McCloud petitioned the Supreme Court of Florida for review of the decision of this court in McCloud v. State, 517 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), alleging express and direct conflict with State v. Slappy, 522 So. 2d 18 (Fla.1988) and Blackshear v. State, 521 So. 2d 1083 (Fla.1988) (Black-shear II). Our supreme court remanded McCloud to this court for reconsideration in light of its holding in Slappy and Blackshear II. McCloud v. State, 580 So. 2d 56 (Fla.1988). After reconsideration we affirm the lower court in Circuit Court Case Number 85-4591. We reverse and remand for new trial in Circuit Court Case Number 85-4592.
In Slappy the supreme court held that, in cases in which a member of a distinct minority group allegedly has been removed improperly from a jury venire by the state, any doubt as to whether the complaining party has met its initial burden in challenging this practice should be resolved in that party’s favor. The court further held that the state then must tender reasons for its exercise of peremptory challenges that are neutral and reasonable, and not a pretext. Blackshear II quashed the decision of this court in Blackshear v. State, 504 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), wherein we held that the defendant had failed to demonstrate a strong likelihood that the challenge of black venirepersons occurred for racial reasons.
This appeal involves two judgments^ and sentences entered pursuant to the verdicts of two separate juries rendered in two separate trials held more than a month apart. In each case the state used some of its peremptory challenges to strike black members of the venire and in each case the defendant, a black man, moved to strike the venire and for a mistrial on the ground that prospective black jurors were challenged solely on the basis of their race. The trial judge apparently found that there was a likelihood that the prospective jurors had been challenged because of their race, since he directed an inquiry into the state’s use of its peremptory challenges. In response to the inquiry into the use of its peremptory challenges in Case No. 85-4591 the state gave explanations for the challenges which appeared reasonable, race-neutral and non-pretextual. The trial judge, whose primary responsibilities include making assessments of credibility, accepted the proffered explanations as valid and truthful. It is not the function or prerogative of an appellate court to substitute its judgment for that of the trial judge on the issue of the credibility of the state’s reasons unless the record reflects a clear abuse of discretion.
In Case No. 85-4592, after the trial court inquired into the state’s reasons for challenging black members of the venire, the state failed to give any reasons for three of its challenges. As the state did not carry its burden of providing nonracial reasons for its challenge of each of these three prospective jurors, the defense motion for mistrial should have been granted.
We therefore affirm the judgment and sentence of the lower court in Case No. 87-4591. We reverse the judgment and sentence in Case No. 87-4592 and remand for new trial.
ZEHMER and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Files v. State, 586 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…stitute its judgment for that of the prosecutor, but merely to decide if the state’s assertions are such that some reasonable persons would agree. 522 So. 2d at 22-23. See abo Mitchell v. State, 548 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); McCloud v. State, 536 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc. v. The Association of School Consultants, Inc., 586 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Bohannon v. State, 557 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 569 So. 2d 1278 (Fla.1990). . Hernandez v. New…1 / 2
-
Junious Edward Mitchell v. State, 548 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…erly decline to substitute its judgment for that of counsel. See Slap-py, supra. Likewise, the appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the lower court in assessing credibility, absent an abuse of discretion. See McCloud v. State, 536 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). But the proffered reasons should not be merely accepted at face value; they must be evaluated as a disputed issue of fact. See Slappy, supra. And once a likelihood of racial motivation has been demonstrated, the state must tende…
-
Bohannon v. State, 557 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…ot abuse its discretion in concluding that the state’s peremptory challenge of a single black juror — who was replaced by another black juror whom the prosecution did not excuse — was not unconstitutionally based upon her race. See McCloud v. State, 536 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Thomas v. State, 502 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), review denied, 509 So. 2d 1119 (Fla.1987); Taylor v. State, 491 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), review denied, 501 So. 2d 1284 (Fla.1986); Schlanger v. State, 397 So. 2d 1028…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Slappy, 522 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1988)
- Blackshear v. State, 521 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 1988)
- Blackshear v. State, 504 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- McCLOUD v. State, 517 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)