ROBERTO GUERRA ENAMORADO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1999-06-30
No. 98-0900
Before COPE, GODERICH and FLETCHER, JJ.
733 So. 2d 1164 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1999) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s claim that he was entitled to more peremptory challenges as a matter of right was not presented to the trial court, and is thus not properly preserved for appellate review. See Maio v. State, 531 So. 2d 1055, 1056-57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Verreautt v. State, 411 So. 2d 234, 234-35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).

We decline to entertain on this direct appeal appellant’s alternative claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to recognize that appellant was entitled to ten peremptory challenges, rather than six. This ruling is without prejudice to appellant to pursue a motion for postconviction relief in the trial court. We express no opinion on the merits of any such motion.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dante v. State, 903 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
    …ot preserved for appellate review. See Joiner v. State, 618 So. 2d 174, 176 (Fla.1993) (finding that a defendant had waived any objection to peremptory strikes by affirmatively accepting the jury immediately before it was sworn); Enamorado v. State, 733 So. 2d 1164, 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (“Appellant’s claim that he was entitled to more peremptory challenges as a matter of right was not presented to the trial court, and is thus not properly preserved for appellate review.”) (citing Maio and Verreautt). We con…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw