WALNER DESHOMMES
v.
MANNO EXALANT
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.
A defendant may assess a juror's credibility and demeanor during voir dire and trial while the juror wears a face mask, and there is no constitutional right requiring a defendant to see a juror's facial expression.
[1] A defendant may assess a juror's credibility and demeanor during voir dire and trial notwithstanding that the juror wears a face mask, and there is no constitutional righ…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“there is no constitutional right that requires a defendant to see a juror's facial expression or allows him to communicate non-verbally with a juror”
United States v. Trimarco, cited for the proposition that no constitutional right exists regarding facial visibility of jurors
Walner Deshommes appealed a circuit court decision in Broward County. The appeal involved issues related to jury procedures and juror visibility durin…
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 Motion For Continuance cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
WALNER DESHOMMES, Appellant,
v.
MANNO EXALANT, Appellee.
No. 4D22-513
[November 2, 2022]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; John B. Bowman, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE20-11205.
Lawrence R. Metsch of Metschlaw, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.
Vivian H. Fazio of Law Offices of Vivian H. Fazio, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and Michele K. Feinzig of Michele K. Feinzig, P.A., Coral Springs, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See United States v. Schwartz, No. 19-20451, 2021 WL 5283948, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 12, 2021) (“All courts that have considered this question so far have universally reached the conclusion that a defendant can still assess a juror’s credibility and demeanor during both voir dire and trial while the juror is wearing a face mask.”); United States v. Trimarco, No. 17-CR-583 (JMA), 2020 WL 5211051, at *1, *5 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2020) (denying a motion for continuance “until some indeterminate time in the future” when safety measures ordered in response to the COVID-19 pandemic are lifted, and agreeing with the government that “there is no constitutional right that requires a defendant to see a juror’s facial expression or allows him to communicate nonverbally with a juror.”).
GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and FORST, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.