Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1963–2009 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Washington v. Stategreen1 sentence1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d | 1 | 1 |
Charleston v. Senkowskigreen2 sentences1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d 1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d | 1 | 1 |
State v. Slappygreen1 sentence1994See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); Reeves v. State, 632 So.2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); House v. State, 614 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Andrews v. Adamsgreen1 sentence1994See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); Reeves v. State, 632 So.2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); House v. State, 614 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Galloway Farms, Inc. v. Phoenix Mutual Life Insurancegreen1 sentence1994See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); Reeves v. State, 632 So.2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); House v. State, 614 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Men's International Professional Tennis Council v. Volvo North America Corp.green1 sentence1994See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); Reeves v. State, 632 So.2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); House v. State, 614 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Melbourne v. State
green
1 sentence2009When this Court initially examined the issue, we agreed that, under Melbourne v. State, 679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996), where the proffered reason for the peremptory strike is facially race-neutral, the trial court must then determine whether the strike is pretextual before it can be disallowed. 1 We found that, based on the transcripts supplied in the original appeal, the trial court was required, but failed, to conduct the third step in that inquiry as to the genuineness of the explanation for the strike of juror Gray. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Young v. State
green
1 sentence2000We therefore recede from that part of Rivera holding that the form of the objection was facially insufficient to trigger an inquiry under Abshire-Melbourne as to whether a peremptory challenge was being improperly exercised. *529 Turning next to the court's holding that the reasons given by defense counsel were not genuine, we follow our recent precedent in Young v. State, 744 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
United States v. Spiver Whitney Gordon
green
1 sentence1999Significantly, Slappy stated that where "the total course of questioning of all jurors shows the presence of any of the five factors ... and the state fails to offer convincing rebuttal, then the state's explanation must be deemed a pretext." Id. at 23 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Alexander v. State
green
1 sentence1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Barnes v. State
green
1 sentence1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Rivera v. State
green
1 sentence1996See Washington v. State, 653 So.2d 362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 387 , 133 L.Ed.2d 309 (1995) (upholding state's peremptory challenge of African-American juror based on opposition to death penalty); Rivera v. State, 670 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (reversing denial of defendant's peremptory challenge where explanation that juror was deputy clerk employed in jury room at the courthouse who knew the participants and worked in the very system that would be responsible for trying defendant was sufficient gender-neutral reason); Alexander v. State, 643 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d | 1 | 1996–1996 |
House v. State
green
1 sentence1994See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); Reeves v. State, 632 So.2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); House v. State, 614 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Reeves v. State
green
1 sentence1994See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219 , 108 S.Ct. 2873 , 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988); Reeves v. State, 632 So.2d 702 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); House v. State, 614 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Kenneth v. Dill v. Clayton L. Scuka, M.D
green
1 sentence1963Tracy: ‘The reasons given for this rule * * * are none of them very sound.’ In an exhaustive article, Mason Ladd advocates ‘complete abolition of the rule’ and proposes as a statutory substitute: ‘No party shall be precluded from impeaching a witness because the witness is his own.’ Finally, the Model Code of Evidence framed by the American Law Institute abolishes the prohibition: ‘ * for the purpose of impairing or supporting the credibility of a witness, any party including the party calling him may examine him and introduce extrinsic evidence concerning any conduct by him and any other matt | 1 | 1963–1963 |
United States v. Uarte
green
1 sentence1963Tracy: ‘The reasons given for this rule * * * are none of them very sound.’ In an exhaustive article, Mason Ladd advocates ‘complete abolition of the rule’ and proposes as a statutory substitute: ‘No party shall be precluded from impeaching a witness because the witness is his own.’ Finally, the Model Code of Evidence framed by the American Law Institute abolishes the prohibition: ‘ * for the purpose of impairing or supporting the credibility of a witness, any party including the party calling him may examine him and introduce extrinsic evidence concerning any conduct by him and any other matt | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.