Feeney v. State, II-73
| Decision Date | 09 June 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. II-73,II-73 |
| Citation | 359 So.2d 569 |
| Parties | James Michael FEENEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
David Cohen, Liberty, N.Y., for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Arguing four points for reversal, appellant seeks review of a judgment of guilt and resulting sentences on two counts of robbery with the use of a firearm of which a jury found him guilty. We find only one point to merit this opinion, and that only because of its novelty. Only those facts which are relevant to our discussion here will be recited.
An armed robbery occurred in Alachua County, which resulted in the arrest of four men. One pled guilty to attempted robbery and testified against the others. Another was tried separately and acquitted. The trial of appellant Feeney and one Samuel Smith, who were tried together, ended in a hung jury and a resulting new trial. They were thereafter retried "in an experimental manner", the same trial judge conducting two separate trials simultaneously in the same courtroom but before two separate juries, one of which was removed when evidence was offered which was admissible only against the other defendant. The evidence relevant to both defendants was adduced only once in the presence of both juries. The Smith jury found him not guilty of either of the two charges for which he was tried but the Feeney jury found him guilty of both.
The state now urges that the appellant should not be heard to complain of the simultaneous trial procedure because of failure to state an objection on the record. The state's position in that regard is untenable in view of the following statement of the trial judge which does appear of record:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Harris
...138 Ariz. 63, 673 P.2d 1, 8 ["[d]efendant in the instant case can point to no specific error occurring at trial"]; Feeney v. State (Fla.App.1978) 359 So.2d 569, 570 ["[i]n the absence of demonstrated prejudice we are loathe to disapprove the novel procedure employed sub judice."]; State v. ......
-
Ewish v. State, 23153
...843, 108 S.Ct. 135, 98 L.Ed.2d 92 (1987); People v. Wardlow, 118 Cal.App.3d 375, 173 Cal.Rptr. 500 (Ct.App.1981); Feeney v. State, 359 So.2d 569 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1978). Other courts characterize the procedure as ladened with administration difficulties and an aggravator of what it was desig......
-
Loren v. State, BD-485
...showing of abuse of discretion. See, King v. State, 514 So.2d 354 (Fla.1987); Jent v. State, 408 So.2d 1024 (Fla.1981); Feeney v. State, 359 So.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Before ruling on the use of the transcript, the trial judge heard a proffer of all evidence concerning the making of th......
-
Thompson v. State
...the case of the other defendant, with the exception of certain evidence which will be more fully discussed infra.2 Feeney v. State, 359 So.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Velez v. State, 596 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).3 Thompson claims the trial court denied his motion to discharge without e......
-
Joint criminal trials with multiple juries: why they are used and suggested ways to implement them.
...has been used as a basis for approving multiple jury trials.[13] Florida's Experience with Multiple Jury Trials In Feeney v. State, 359 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), Florida became one of the first states to endorse multiple juries after the Ninth Circuit's Sidman decision.[14] Feeney was......