Chester v. State
725 So. 2d 1274, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1435, 1999 WL 72193
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Chester v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 737 So. 2d 557 →
Opinion
After careful consideration of the well-presented arguments to the contrary, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s disal-lowance of a defense peremptory challenge. Melbourne v. State, 679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Chester v. State, 725 So. 2d 1274, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1435, 1999 WL 72193 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).
725 So. 2d 1274 (Chester v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Melbourne v. State
679 So. 2d 759 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)