E. J. CO. ET AL.

v.

SANDVIK AKTIEBOLAG

Citator

Cited By (13 total)

• Dolan Darling v. State, 808 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 2002)
  …argues that the trial court erred in limiting defense counsel’s questioning regarding capital case issues during voir dire examination of prospective jurors. As stated by the Court in Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1312, 1322 (Fla.1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1040, 118 S.Ct. 1337, 140 L.Ed.2d 499 (1998), “[t]he scope of voir dire questioning rests in the sound discretion of the court and will not be interfered with unless that discretion is clearly abused.” Based upon the record in this case, the trial court…
• Young v. State, 744 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
  …(Fla.1998). Since Melbourne, both the supreme court and this court have acknowledged, and upheld the trial court’s broad discretion in ruling on the exercise of peremptory challenges. See Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1332 (Fla.1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1040, 118 S.Ct. 1337, 140 L.Ed.2d 499 (1998); cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1097, 118 S.Ct. 1582, 140 L.Ed.2d 797 (1998); State v. Holiday, 682 So. 2d 1092 (Fla.1996); King v. Byrd, 716 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Anderson v. State, 711 So. 2d 230 [*1083] (…
• Lightbourne v. State, 742 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 1999)
  …um, but must look at the total picture of all the evidence when making its decision. When rendering the order on review, the trial court did not have the benefit of our recent decision in Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 521-22 (Fla.), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1040, 118 S.Ct. 1350, 140 L.Ed.2d 499 (1998), where we explained that when a prior evidentiary hearing has been conducted, “the trial court is required to ‘consider all newly discovered evidence which would be admissible’ at trial and then evaluate the ‘…