Telemaque v. State, 91-1649
| Decision Date | 31 December 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-1649,91-1649 |
| Citation | 591 So.2d 675 |
| Parties | Michael TELEMAQUE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. 591 So.2d 675, 17 Fla. L. Week. D142 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Valerie Jonas, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Consuelo Maingot, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and GODERICH, JJ.
Defendant appeals his convictions and sentences for battery on a law enforcement officer, battery, and resisting arrest without violence. During voir dire the state asserted that defendant was not exercising his peremptory challenges in a race-neutral manner and moved to strike the panel. The trial judge denied the motion, but stated that he would not permit defendant's next peremptory challenge. When defendant attempted to exercise another peremptory challenge, the court rejected the challenge. Defendant asserts the court committed reversible error.
We agree. The trial court's denial of defendant's peremptory challenge infringed on his "right to challenge any juror, either peremptorily or for cause, prior to the time the jury is sworn." Gilliam v. State, 514 So.2d 1098, 1099 (Fla.1987), citing Jackson v. State, 464 So.2d 1181, 1183 (Fla.1985). The trial court's denial constitutes per se reversible error. Gilliam, 514 So.2d at 1099. We therefore reverse defendant's convictions and remand for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dante v. State, 3D03-3239.
...required. See Green v. State, 673 So.2d 937 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Smith v. State, 662 So.2d 1336 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Telemaque v. State, 591 So.2d 675 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). This court has long held that a timely objection is required to preserve the issue for appeal, as it affords the trial ju......
-
Dante v. State, Case No. 3D03-3239 (FL 3/23/2005), Case No. 3D03-3239.
...trial court's refusal to allow defendant to use available peremptory challenges constitutes per se reversible error); Telemaque v. State, 591 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(holding that trial court's improper denial of peremptory challenge constitutes per se reversible error). Therefore, bec......
- Estate of Kero, In re, 91-02011
-
Montgomery v. State
...514 So.2d 1098, 1099 (Fla.1987) (citations omitted). The denial of that right is per se reversible error. Id. See also Telemaque v. State, 591 So.2d 675 (Fla. 3d DCA1991) (same), and Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.310 ("The state or defendant may challenge an individual prospective juror before the juror ......