ANTHONY TYRONE GOOCH, 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 trial judge erred by failing to make a conscientious evaluation of the defendant's claim that a peremptory strike was used in a racially discriminatory manner.
During jury selection, the state used a peremptory challenge to strike the only black juror. The defense objected, but the trial judge stated no expla…
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 Reason For Strike cases and more on FLexlaw
WIGGINTON, Judge.
Appellant appeals his conviction, after jury trial, of armed robbery. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
During jury selection, the state used a peremptory challenge to strike the only black juror on the panel. The defense immediately raised an objection pursuant to State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1984). The trial judge declared that he did not believe an explanation for the strike was necessary, but the state provided a reason anyway and the defense responded that the reason was not race neutral. The judge responded merely that no explanation was necessary.
On appeal, the state concedes that since the stricken juror was the only black juror on the panel, the defense did meet its initial burden under Neil to show a strong likelihood that the juror was stricken because of his race, thereby imposing on the state the burden to provide a race neutral reason to justify the strike. See Bowden v. State, 588 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1991) and Reynolds v. State, 576 So. 2d 1300 (Fla.1991). As in Barwick v. State, 547 So. 2d 612 (Fla.1989), we find no indication in the instant record that the trial judge made a conscientious evaluation of appellant’s Neil claim by critically considering the reason given by the state for the strike. Therefore, pursuant to Neil and Barwick, we are compelled to reverse appellant’s conviction and remand for a new trial.
REVERSED AND REMANDED for a new trial.
ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Givens v. State, 619 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…ts “function of critically evaluating the state’s explanation,” see Mansell, 609 So. 2d at 682-83, to assure reasonableness and the absence of a pretext for racial discrimination. Roundtree v. State, 546 So. 2d 1042, 1045 (Fla.1989); Gooch v. State, 605 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The state challenged Mrs. Macon peremptorily “because she is single, [sic] she does not own her own home.” After the trial court accepted that explanation, defense counsel informed the court that Mrs. Macon was, in fact, a home…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Neil, 457 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1984)
- Bowden v. State, 588 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 1991)
- Reynolds v. State, 576 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 1991)
- Barwick v. State, 547 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1989)