State v. Mejia, No. 88568

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM; KOGAN
Citation696 So.2d 339
Docket NumberNo. 88568
Decision Date26 June 1997
Parties22 Fla. L. Weekly S384 STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Carlos Omar MEJIA, Respondent.

Page 339

696 So.2d 339
22 Fla. L. Weekly S384
STATE of Florida, Petitioner,
v.
Carlos Omar MEJIA, Respondent.
No. 88568.
Supreme Court of Florida.
June 26, 1997.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal--Direct Conflict of Decisions, First District--Case No. 95-1182 (Washington County).

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; James W. Rogers, Tallahassee Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, and Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Petitioner.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Assistant Public Defender, Chief, Appellate Intake Division, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Page 340

PER CURIAM.

We granted review of Mejia v. State, 675 So.2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), because of conflict with the opinion in Gibson v. State, 661 So.2d 288 (Fla.1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

In Mejia, the First District Court of Appeal examined whether the trial court committed error in failing to ensure that Mejia executed a knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to be present at bench conferences where peremptory challenges were exercised. The district court stated that although it was unclear whether Coney v. State, 653 So.2d 1009 (Fla.1995), applied to the case or not, it would assume for purposes of its opinion that Coney did apply. Mejia, 675 So.2d at 999.

In Coney, this Court held that a defendant has the right to be physically present at the immediate site where pretrial juror challenges are exercised, but that the right can be waived if the court certifies "through proper inquiry that the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary." Coney, 653 So.2d at 1013. Although the Mejia court ultimately held that any error was harmless, and therefore Mejia was not entitled to relief, it concluded that a violation of Coney constituted fundamental error which may be raised for the first time on appeal. Mejia, 675 So.2d at 999, 1001. The State argues that this conflicts with this Court's opinion in Gibson, where this Court held that a Coney issue was not preserved by objection at trial. See Gibson, 661 So.2d at 291.

We find it unnecessary to reach the issue of whether there is conflict with this Court because we find that Coney did not apply to the decision in Mejia. Jury selection in Mejia commenced on January 23, 1995, but Coney did not become final until April 27, 1995. When we state that a ruling is prospective only, the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 practice notes
  • Allocco v. City of Coral Gables, No. 99-2443-CIV.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Southern District of Florida
    • August 23, 2002
    ...for which they could be held accountable in unreasonably relying upon the defendants' alleged representations, see Gilchrist Timber, 696 So.2d at 339, there is no question for the jury based upon this record because the plaintiffs have not disputed any of the facts presented by the defendan......
  • Garland v. Advanced Medical Fund, L.P. II, No. CIV.A. 1:97-CV-0010-JOF.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Northern District of Georgia
    • January 18, 2000
    ...Florida law imposes a duty on the recipient reasonably to investigate the truth or falsity of the statements. See Gilchrist, 696 So.2d at 339. Because Plaintiffs admittedly did not read the documents, scrutinize the information provided by Anderson, or consult independent advisers, they hav......
  • Carmichael v. State, No. 90811
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 9, 1998
    ...(the date Coney became final), and before January 1, 1997 (the date the amendment to rule 3.180 became effective). See State v. Mejia, 696 So.2d 339 (Fla.1997); 2 We later held the Coney rule inapplicable to Coney himself and other "pipeline" defendants. Boyett v. State, 688 So.2d 308 (Fla.......
  • Mendez v. Land Investors, Corp., Case No. 2:12-cv-158-FtM-29UAM
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • January 8, 2014
    ...information that a reasonable person in the position of the recipient would be expected to investigate." Gilchrist Timber Co., 696 So. 2d at 339. Based on the competent evidence, the Court finds that Mendez acted in justifiable reliance upon the first two statements in her decisions to purc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
28 cases
  • Allocco v. City of Coral Gables, No. 99-2443-CIV.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Southern District of Florida
    • August 23, 2002
    ...for which they could be held accountable in unreasonably relying upon the defendants' alleged representations, see Gilchrist Timber, 696 So.2d at 339, there is no question for the jury based upon this record because the plaintiffs have not disputed any of the facts presented by the defendan......
  • Garland v. Advanced Medical Fund, L.P. II, No. CIV.A. 1:97-CV-0010-JOF.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Northern District of Georgia
    • January 18, 2000
    ...Florida law imposes a duty on the recipient reasonably to investigate the truth or falsity of the statements. See Gilchrist, 696 So.2d at 339. Because Plaintiffs admittedly did not read the documents, scrutinize the information provided by Anderson, or consult independent advisers, they hav......
  • Carmichael v. State, No. 90811
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 9, 1998
    ...(the date Coney became final), and before January 1, 1997 (the date the amendment to rule 3.180 became effective). See State v. Mejia, 696 So.2d 339 (Fla.1997); 2 We later held the Coney rule inapplicable to Coney himself and other "pipeline" defendants. Boyett v. State, 688 So.2d 308 (Fla.......
  • Mendez v. Land Investors, Corp., Case No. 2:12-cv-158-FtM-29UAM
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • January 8, 2014
    ...information that a reasonable person in the position of the recipient would be expected to investigate." Gilchrist Timber Co., 696 So. 2d at 339. Based on the competent evidence, the Court finds that Mendez acted in justifiable reliance upon the first two statements in her decisions to purc......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT