SAMUEL NORWOOD
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 trial court did not err in reducing defendant's peremptory challenges from twelve to eight under Act 495 of 1988, as changes to peremptory challenge procedures are merely procedural and may apply retroactively without violating ex post facto prohibitions. The court also properly admitted defendant's oral confession after a separate suppression hearing and correctly declined to give a jury instruction regarding an adverse presumption for the state's failure to call a subpoenaed witness who was equally available to both parties.
[1] A change in the number of peremptory challenges is procedural and may have retroactive effect without violating the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws.
[2] A trial court may permit the filing of a motion to suppress at any time before or during the trial in its discretion.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“”
Court's rationale for rejecting defendant's ex post facto challenge to retroactive application of Act 495 reducing peremptory challenges
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeroy Harrison was arrested at the scene after raping a victim at her home in Abbeville. During police interrogation, he made both an oral confession …
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.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
SAMUEL NORWOOD, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4025 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed March 7, 2018. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; William D. Sites, Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See §§ 775.082(3)(b), 812.133(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2005); England v. State, 940 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 2006); Carpenter v. State, 884 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Dorsett v. State, 166 So. 3d 898 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015); Shivers v. State, 96 So. 3d 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Williams v. State, 907 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Atwater v. State, 781 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Robinson v. State, 642 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). NORTHCUTT, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- England v. State, 940 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 2006)
- Robaldo v. State, 884 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Williams v. State, 907 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- Reyes v. State, 642 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Potter v. State, 781 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Alphonso Shivers v. State, 96 So. 3d 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
- Atwater v. State, 781 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Francisco v. State, 166 So. 3d 898 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
- Ives Renna v. State, 96 So. 3d 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)