CLIFFORD SHELTON, 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.
The court held that the prosecutor's explanation for a peremptory challenge was not a clear and reasonably specific racially neutral explanation, establishing the challenge was racially motivated.
During voir dire, the state exercised a peremptory challenge against a black prospective juror. Defense counsel objected on racial grounds, but the tr…
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 Race-Neutral Explanation cases and more on FLexlaw
GARRETT, Judge.
Appellant seeks reversal of his attempted sexual battery and aggravated assault convictions and his sentences as an habitual offender. During voir dire the state exercised a peremptory challenge of a black prospective juror. After defense counsel objected on racial grounds, the prosecutor attempted to justify the challenge:
[The excused juror] is continuously looking down and he knows [appellant] from somewhere and I don’t know where, but I don’t want him to recognize him from the trial.
The trial judge overruled the objection and excused the challenged juror. The appellant met his initial burden of objecting and showing that the challenged juror belonged to a distinct racial group. State v. Slappy, 522 So:2d 18 (Fla.), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219, 108 S.Ct. 2873, 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1984). The prosecutor’s failure to question the juror about the grounds for the challenge rendered the explanation “suspect.” Slappy, 522 So. 2d at 22. Because the objection was not frivolous the burden shifted to the state to present a “clear and reasonably specific racially neutral explanation.” Id. As conceded by the state, nothing in the record shows that the challenged juror knew appellant. Also, we find nothing in the record to substantiate that the juror was “looking down.” The prosecutor’s baseless explanation established that the peremptory challenge was racially motivated. See Reed v. State, 560 So. 2d 203, 206 (Fla.1990).
Accordingly, we reverse appellant’s convictions and sentences and remand for a new trial. We do not address the remaining issues except to state that the habitual offender statute limits an enhanced third degree felony sentence to “a term of years not exceeding 10.” § 775.084(4)(a)(3), Fla. Stat. (1987).
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL.
DOWNEY and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shelton v. State, 739 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…and 1989 convictions. See Shelton v. State, 576 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Shelton v. State, 590 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Shelton appealed his 1987 conviction and this court reversed and remanded for a new trial. See Shelton v. State, 563 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). He was retried and again convicted of the 1987 charges, declared an habitual felony offender, and sentenced to thirty years in prison. He appealed his 1987 conviction a second time, and this court affirmed. See Shelton v. State,…
-
Green v. State, 572 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…ted supreme court case law by placing on the challenging party the burden to justify its peremptory challenge of a prospective black juror upon merely the other side’s objection thereto, or which can be read as having done so.' See Shelton v. State, 563 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (following state’s peremptory challenge of black prospective juror, defendant’s objection thereto simply on grounds that the challenged juror belonged to a distinct racial group was said to have placed upon state the burden to sh…
-
Green v. State, 575 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…ory challenges to remove two black jurors. On retrial the trial court and prosecutor are obligated to comply with the requirements of State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481, 486-87 (Fla.1984); Roundtree v. State, 546 So. 2d 1042 (Fla.1989); Shelton v. State, 563 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); and Floyd v. State, 569 So. 2d 1225, 1229 (Fla.1990). GLICKSTEIN, J., and WALDEN, JAMES H., (Retired), Associate Judge, concur. STONE, J., dissents with opinion.…
Previewing 3 of 5 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)
- Men's Int'l Prof'l Tennis Council v. Volvo N. Am. Corp., 487 U.S. 1219 (U.S. 1988)
- Waste Mgmt. of Wis., Inc. v. Wis. Dep't of Natural Res., 487 U.S. 1219 (U.S. 1988)