State v. Safford
| Decision Date | 20 March 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 66730,66730 |
| Citation | 484 So.2d 1244,11 Fla. L. Weekly 117 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 117 STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Sandy SAFFORD, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Calvin L. Fox and Carolyn M. Snurkowski, Asst. Attys. Gen., Miami, for petitioner.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Henry H. Harnage, Asst. Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, for respondent.
The issue in this case is whether our decision in State v. Neil, 457 So.2d 481 (Fla.1984), is to be applied to cases where the jury was selected prior to Neil, but the cases were not finalized. These have been generally referred to as "pipeline" cases. We find that any person whose case was in the original trial or appellate process and who has followed the procedure specified in Neil to contest the racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges is entitled to have Neil applied to that person's case. Our comment that Neil was not to be applied retroactively was intended to forestall the use of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 in collateral attacks on final judgments. Neil is not to be applied to those cases where the original trial and appellate processes were completed when Neil became effective; Neil does apply to those cases where the original trial or original appeal had not been so completed.
The opinion of the district court in Safford v. State, 463 So.2d 378 (Fla.3d DCA 1985), is approved.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bunkley v. State
...appeals were not yet complete at the time our decision in Palmer was issued were entitled to its benefit. See, e.g., State v. Safford, 484 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla.1986) (interpreting our holding in State v. Neil, 457 So.2d 481 (Fla.1984), that it would not be retroactively applied, meant that......
-
Roberts v. State
...and Batson and Slappy are not fundamental changes in the law which would allow collateral consideration of the issue. See State v. Safford, 484 So.2d 1244 (Fla.1986) (Neil not to be retroactively applied to cases where appellate process was completed when Neil became effective). In Slappy, ......
-
Mitchell v. Moore
...telephonic request not to question a defendant further until that attorney could arrive was a violation of due process); State v. Safford, 484 So.2d 1244 (Fla.1986) (declined to retroactively apply State v. Neil, 457 So.2d 481 (Fla.1984), which changed the long-standing rule in Florida that......
-
Bunkley v. State
...of our own precedent establishing attempted felony murder as a valid offense. See Woodley, 695 So.2d at 298; see also State v. Safford, 484 So.2d 1244 (Fla.1986) (declining to retroactively apply State v. Neil, 457 So.2d 481 (Fla.1984), which changed the long-standing rule in Florida that a......