Curtis v. State

767 So. 2d 627, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 12354, 2000 WL 1397622
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 27, 2000·No. No. 3D99-1827·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Fred Curtis appeals his conviction for numerous counts of child sexual abuse-related crimes. He contends that his convictions should be reversed and he should be granted a new trial because the trial court erroneously denied his challenge for cause to one of the prospective jurors for his trial and subsequently denied his request for two additional peremptory challenges to remove other “objectionable” jurors from the panel. Our review of the record shows, however, that the trial judge did, in fact, give Curtis an additional peremptory challenge, for a total of eleven peremptory challenges. We affirm because the award of this additional peremptory challenge cured the admittedly erroneous denial of the challenge for cause of the objectionable juror. See Watson v. State, 651 So.2d 1159, 1162 (Fla.1994).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Curtis v. State, 767 So. 2d 627, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 12354, 2000 WL 1397622 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

767 So. 2d 627 (Curtis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Weinstein Design Group, Inc. v. Fielder
884 So. 2d 990 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)