ARLINGTON BLYE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a criminal conviction and ordered a new trial because the trial court erred in refusing to excuse a juror for cause despite the juror's admitted lack of objectivity. The State conceded the error at oral argument.
The conviction is reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court erroneously declined to excuse the juror for cause, notwithstanding his apparent lack of objectivity.
[1] A trial court errs by declining to excuse a juror for cause when the juror expresses difficulty remaining objective due to prior experiences.
[2] A conviction must be reversed for a new trial when a trial court erroneously refuses to excuse a juror for cause, and the defendant properly preserves the issue through t…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the trial court erroneously declined to excuse a juror for cause, notwithstanding his apparent lack of objectivity in the case”
States the core error requiring reversal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDuring voir dire, Juror Sisodia disclosed that two close friends had been robbed and assaulted in incidents similar to the charged offense. When quest…
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 Challenge For Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The conviction under review is reversed for a new trial because, as the state candidly conceded at oral argument, the trial court erroneously declined to excuse a juror for cause, notwithstanding his apparent lack of objectivity in the case.1 Since the issue was properly preserved below by the exhaustion of the defendant’s other peremptory challenges and his unsuccessful request for an additional one, reversal is required. Hill v. State, 477 So. 2d 553 (Fla.1985); Salazar v. State, 564 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Jefferson v. State, 489 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), review denied, 494 So. 2d 1153 (Fla.1986); Leon v. State, 396 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 407 So. 2d 1106 (Fla.1981).2
Reversed and Remanded.
. The pertinent colloquy on voir dire was as follows:
JUROR SISODIA: Two friends of ours, both ladies. One was robbed on two separate occasions six months ago, and another one, I don’t remember how long ago, but she was in the driveway and this man came up and grabbed her purse, hit her and ran off on a bike. In the other case a man also grabbed her purse, pushed her down and got away from the car. MR. MURRAY: [Prosecutor] Was anybody apprehended?
JUROR SISODIA: No one was apprehended in either case. This was considered by the police as a very minor thing.
MR. MURRAY: Based on the information you know already about this case, do you feel that your opinions in this case would be swayed by what you know?
JUROR SIDODIA: Well, to be quite honest, I would have difficulty in being objective.
MR. MURRAY: Well, in what way would you have a problem in being objective?
JUROR SISODIA: Well, in these two instances, it would influence me. I would be inclined to believe that the police — I don’t know, I hope that what the police — is that what they should do.
MR. MURRAY: So let me make sure that I get this correctly.
You are saying that because this person is here that therefore the police officer must be telling the truth?
JUROR SISODIA: At this stage, I am afraid I cannot stay very objective, but I think I would try to be objective. But with the incidents that I have had with my friends, I don’t know. [emphasis supplied]
. The appellant's other claims of error involve incidents which are unlikely to recur at the new trial and therefore need not be treated here.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Melvyn M. Garcia v. State, 570 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…l. During jury selection, the trial court erroneously declined to excuse a juror for cause, notwithstanding the fact that the statements made by the juror during voir dire raised reasonable doubt about her competency as a juror.1 See Blye v. State, 566 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Salazar v. State, 564 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). This reasonable doubt remained de [*1083] spite the juror’s answers to leading questions about her ability to follow the law. See Club West, Inc. v. Tropigas of Fla., Inc., 51…
-
Wilkins v. State, 607 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…y on the evidence adduced at trial and follow the court’s instruction as to the state’s burden of proof in a criminal case. Hamilton v. State, 547 So. 2d 630, 633 (Fla.1989); Salazar v. State, 564 So. 2d 1245, 1246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Blye v. State, 566 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Moreover, the point has, without dispute, been adequately preserved for appellate review. Trotter v. State, 576 So. 2d 691 (Fla.1990). Second, we are greatly concerned by the inadmissible evidence adduced at trial by the state…
-
Segura v. State, 921 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…clearly expressed doubts as to her ability to be fair based on her experience with a family member victim of a similar crime; this was sufficient to justify excusing her for cause.' Wilkins v. State, 607 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Blye v. State, 566 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Salazar v. State, 564 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Juror Mihaiu expressed his conviction that led the defense to logically conclude that “the accused must produce evidence of his innocence to avoid a conviction at the hands of…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hill v. State, 477 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1985)
- Leon v. State, 396 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Jefferson v. State, 489 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Salazar v. State, 564 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)