ODESSA RUSH RANDOLPH, PETITIONER,

v.

HERMAN P. BARKER, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• E. AIR Lines, Inc. v. Gellert, 438 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
  …lved, namely the broad discretion vested in the trial court to control the manner in which peremptory challenges are to be exercised, Peri v. State, 426 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Barker v. Randolph, 239 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 242 So. 2d 137 (Fla.1970); Gafford v. Star Fish & Oyster Co., 475 F. 2d 767 (5th Cir.1973), and the right of a litigant to have a fair opportunity to make an intelligent judgment as to the exercise of the peremptory challenges guaranteed to him by law, see Loftin…
• Rock v. State, 638 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 1994)
  …omoting jury management and efficiency. See, e.g., Barker v. Randolph, 239 So. 2d 110, 112 (Fla. 1st DCA) (trial judge has discretion to “reasonably control voir dire examination in the interest of orderliness and dispatch of trials”), cert. denied, 242 So. 2d 137 (Fla.1970). Trial courts also have broad discretion in the procedural conduct of trials. Feeney v. State, 359 So. 2d 569, 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (court upheld simultaneous trial procedure even though there was no authority for trial judge to employ…
• Jones v. State, 378 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
  …ion of prospective jurors by appellant’s counsel. Meaningful voir dire examination of prospective jurors, by the court and by counsel, is assured by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.300(b). See also Barker v. Randolph, 239 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970), cert. den., 242 So. 2d 137; Poole v. State, 194 So. 2d 903 (Fla.1967). Subject to the trial court’s control of unreasonably repetitious and argumentative voir dire questioning, counsel must have an opportunity to ascertain latent or concealed pre [*798] judgments by prospecti…

Authorities Cited

• Davis v. State, 239 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)