Abraham Jackson Mpaka v. State of Florida

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: January 14, 2026
• Docket: 3D2023-1454
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed January 14, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1454 Lower Tribunal No. F08-47375 ________________

Abraham Jackson Mpaka, Appellant,

vs.

State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Robert T. Watson, Judge.

Wasson & Associates, Chartered, and Roy D. Wasson, for appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General and Katryna Santa Cruz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SCALES, C.J., and EMAS and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Craven v. State, 310 So. 3d 891, 899 (Fla. 2020) (“Under

Florida law, a party's use of peremptory challenges is limited only by the rule

that the challenges may not be used to exclude members of a ‘distinctive

group,’ such as race.”) (quoting San Martin v. State, 705 So. 2d 1337, 1343

(Fla. 1997)) (additional citations omitted); Brannon v. State, 320 So. 3d 898,

902 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“The factors relevant to the trial court’s genuineness

inquiry include the ‘racial make-up of the venire, prior strikes exercised

against the same . . . racial group, or singling out the juror for special

treatment.’” (quoting Norona v. State, 137 So. 3d 1096, 1097-97 (Fla. 3d

DCA 2014)); see also Melbourne v. State, 679 So. 2d 759, 764-65 (Fla.

1996) (holding that the trial court’s ultimate determination of genuineness—

whether the proffered reason for the strike was a pretext—turns primarily on

an assessment of credibility, therefore implicating the abuse of discretion

standard, and will be affirmed on appeal unless there is no record support

for the trial court's finding.).