CARRATELLI
v.
STATE
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.
Jeffrey Preston appeals his conviction for Criminal Mischief, challenging the trial court's denial of his cause challenge to a prospective juror and refusal to grant an additional peremptory challenge. The appellate court reverses the conviction, finding that the trial court erred in denying the cause challenge to a juror who expressed predisposition to credit law enforcement testimony over civilian testimony, joining established precedent holding such denials constitute reversible error.
Yes, the trial court committed reversible error by denying the cause challenge to a juror expressing predisposition to credit police officer testimony over civilian testimony. The conviction is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
[1] A prospective juror who expresses a predisposition to give more credence to the testimony of a law enforcement officer than a civilian witness may be subject to a challen…
[2] When a challenge for cause to a prospective juror is improperly denied, and the defendant exhausts peremptory challenges and requests an additional one which is also deni…
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“Juror 10 had an ex-husband who had been a deputy for 30 years, and although she thought she could "come up with a fair decision", she would "put more weight" on the testimony of a police officer.”
Establishes the juror bias that should have been cause for removal
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 10 stated she would give more weight to police officer testimony due to her ex-husband's 30-year career as a deputy. Juror 13 …
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 Juror Impartiality cases and more on FLexlaw
Before POWELL, G. ADAMS, and JOHNSON, J.J.
PER CURIAM.
FINAL ORDER REVERSING TRIAL COURT
Jeffrey Preston appeals his conviction for Criminal Mischief. Having carefully considered the briefs, the record on appeal, the trial transcript and applicable law, we dispense with oral argument pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.320, and reverse.2 of 3
Appellant raises several points, only one of which we need address. He argues that the trial court erred reversibly by denying his challenge for cause as to a prospective juror and denying his request for an additional peremptory challenge.
During voir dire, several jurors expressed a predisposition to give more credence to a law enforcement officer’s testifying than a civilian witness. Juror 10 had an ex-husband who had been a deputy for 30 years, and although she thought she could “come up with a fair decision”, she would “put more weight” on the testimony of a police officer. Juror 13’s sister had been a police officer for 10 years and said that would influence her ability to listen to the testimony of a police officer. Juror 6 had been a deputy “long ago”, but said that nothing could hold him up from being fair and impartial today. The prosecutor objected to Appellant’s challenges for cause as to Jurors 10 and 13, and the court denied both challenges. Appellant exhausted all of his peremptory challenges, using one on Juror 10. He requested an additional peremptory challenge, stating he would use it as to Juror 6, but the court denied the additional challenge. He refused to accept the jury, and Juror 6 remained on the jury which heard the case. Numerous similar cases2 have arisen over the last decade or so which have been reversed because a juror has adhered to his or her predisposition that an officer is more credible than a lay witness, or there was a reasonable doubt about it; a cause challenge was denied, and the error was preserved for appeal. See e.g., Carratelli v. State, 961 So. 2d 312 ( Fla. 2007); Ibarrondo v. State, 1 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Rimes v. State, 993 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DONE AND ORDERED at Orlando, Florida this __15th___ day of __May____, 2012.
_/S/________________________
ROM W. POWELL Senior Judge
/S/
_/S/_________________________ GAIL A. ADAMS ANTHONY H. JOHNSON Circuit Judge Circuit Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing order was furnished to Kimberly M. DeVries, Assistant Public Defender, 435 N. Orange Avenue, Ste. 400, Orlando, Florida 32801; Dugald McMillan, Assistant State Attorney, 415 N. Orange Avenue, Ste. 200, Orlando, Florida 32802-1673; and Honorable Faye Allen, 425 N. Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801, by mail, this _15th___ day of _May________________, 2012.
__/S/_____________________________
Judicial Assistant
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Carratelli v. State, 961 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 2007)
- Jenkins v. State, 824 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Juede v. State, 837 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Polite v. State, 754 So. 2d 859 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Slater v. State, 910 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Scott v. State, 825 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Garcia v. State, 805 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Rimes v. State, 993 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- Alexie Ibarrondo v. State, 1 So. 3d 226 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)