ALBERT PORTER FRANCIS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Voir Dire Examination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Albert Francis appeals from judgments of conviction for two counts of aggravated assault with a firearm. During voir dire examination of prospective jurors, the trial court denied defense counsel an opportunity to question jurors individually. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.300(b) permits “[t]he court [to] examine each prospective juror individually or [to] examine the prospective jurors collectively.” However, the rule also states that “[t]he right of the parties to conduct an examination of each juror orally shall be preserved.” In Gosha v. State, 534 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), this court held that imposition of severe time constraints on counsel’s voir dire examination of each prospective juror is, as a matter of law, unreasonable and an abuse of discretion. That holding compels reversal where, as here, the trial court totally precludes individual examination of jurors. See Pineda v. State, 571 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Berge O. Khandjian and Tuula Khandjian v. Compagnie Financiere Mediterranee Cofimed, S.A., 619 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…Prior to the supreme court’s decision in Morales v. Sperry Rand Corp., 601 So. 2d 538 (Fla.1992), it was consistently held that an order denying a motion to dismiss based on rule 1.070(j) is not an appealable nonfi-nal order. See Hondorat v. Genova, 579 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); LeClaire v. Schneider, 579 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); DCA of Hialeah, Inc. v. Lago Grande One Condominium Ass ’n, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Macke Laundry Services, Inc. v. Saintil, 568 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 4th DC…
-
Comisky v. Rosen Mgmt. Serv., Inc., 630 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…nder the facts presented, and Morales, in my opinion, does not provide this appellant by way of non-final appeal, with what it could not ob [*632] tain through a petition for common law cer-tiorari. Accordingly, I dissent. . See Hondorat v. Genova, 579 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); LeClaire v. Schneider, 579 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); DCA of Hialeah, Inc. v. Lago Grande One Condominium Assn, 559 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Macke Laundry Services, Inc. v. Saintil, 568 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990);…
-
Andros Domonic Miller v. State, 785 So. 2d 662 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…sion of error); Pineda v. State, 571 So. 2d 105, 106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Gosha v. State, 534 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Similarly, the trial court may not deny defense counsel an opportunity to question jurors individually. See Francis v. State, 579 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). The trial court in this case effectively denied individual questioning of the prospective jurors by covering the most important areas of inquiry and then forbidding defense counsel from further exploration.3 In Miller v. State,…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gosha v. State, 534 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Pineda v. State, 571 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)