JACKSON

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

• Hoffman v. State, 474 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 1985)
  …ews on capital punishment. He contends that the veniremen’s ambiguous responses did not affirmatively show that they were irrevocably committed to voting against the death penalty. See Granviel v. Estelle, 655 F. 2d 673 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1003, 102 S.Ct. 1636, 71 L.Ed.2d 870 (1982). The state points out that the argument raised on appeal is different from the argument raised as an objection during jury selection. At voir dire, defense counsel objected to the excusal of certain veniremen…
• Lenson A. Hargrave v. State, 427 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 1983)
  …Indeed, on this issue the state’s witness gave testimony favorable to Hargrave. . We note that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals distinguished Estelle v. Smith on similar grounds in Granviel v. Estelle, 655 F. 2d 673 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1003, 102 S.Ct. 1636, 71 L.Ed.2d 870 (1982). . Even constitutional rights can be waived. Yakus v. United States, 321 U.S. 414, 64 S.Ct. 660, 88 L.Ed. 834 (1944); United States v. Sachs, 679 F. 2d 1015 (1st Cir.1982); Ray v. State, 403 So. 2d 956 (Fla.19…
• Hance v. Zant, 696 F.2d 940 (11th Cir. 1983)
  …tances, is cause to exclude a juror on Witherspoon grounds.”), adhered to, 626 F. 2d 396 (5th Cir.1980) (en banc). The Fifth Circuit has strictly adhered to Witherspoon’s mandate. In Granviel v. Estelle, 655 F. 2d 673 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1003, 102 S.Ct. 1636, 71 L.Ed.2d 870 (1982), this Court held that a veniremember’s exclusion constituted a Witherspoon violation. When asked if he could ever vote to inflict the death penalty, the challenged veniremember had replied, “No, I don’t think I…