JEROME RUDOLPH LENNON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Deference cases and more on FLexlaw
SMITH, Judge.
Appellant appeals his convictions contending the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to improperly exclude blacks from the jury. We affirm.
The prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to excuse three blacks, two women and one man, from the jury panel. The prosecutor explained that he excused the two women because of their close association or familiarity with the appellant and/or his family. The male juror was struck because of his reticence. These are racially-neutral reasons and are supported by the record. To the extent the record is susceptible to differing interpretations, we are required to accord the trial court great deference in matters of this kind. Reed v. State, 560 So. 2d 203 (Fla.1990). The jury selection process in this case met the requirements of State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1984). See Stephens v. State, 559 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
AFFIRMED.
WENTWORTH and JOANOS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Wallace v. Dep't OF Revenue, 774 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…n received from 1993 to 1997. The complexity of this case is solely the result of the source of Mr. Wallace’s income — his social security disability benefits. ■ The trial court properly calculated the child support based upon Williams v. Williams, 560 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). In Williams, the First District encountered a father whose only income source was social security benefits, and those benefits included dependent benefits for his children. In order to calculate guideline child support, the Firs…
-
Valladares v. Junco-Valladares, 30 So. 3d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…the $1515 dependent benefits should be included as part of the husband’s income for purposes of calculating the child support obligation. Id. at 403; see also Wallace v. Dept, of Revenue, 774 So. 2d 804, 808 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Williams v. Williams, 560 So. 2d 308, 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); However, since the dependent benefits will be sent directly to the wife (as primary residential parent) for use on behalf of the children, the $1515 monthly dependent benefit is deemed to be paid on the husband’s behalf. Th…
-
SUN Bank & Tr. Co. v. Jones, 645 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…Sun Bank complied with the February 26th order by filing specific objections to the “home plan” on March 8th. This is sufficient to constitute a timely motion for rehearing, even if the February order is deemed to be final. See Williams v. Williams, 560 So. 2d 308, 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Nardi v. Continental National Bank, 559 So. 2d 307, 308-09 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Griffin v. Tauber-Manon Associates, Inc., 452 So. 2d 577, 578 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Thus, in any event, Sun Bank’s objections tolled the…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1984)
- Grover Reed v. State, 560 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1990)
- Waldon v. State, 559 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)