Fitzgerald v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fitzgerald v. State

658 So. 2d 565, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6718, 1995 WL 366722

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 21, 1995

DocketNo. 94-503

StatusPublished

This text of 658 So. 2d 565 (Fitzgerald v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fitzgerald v. State, 658 So. 2d 565, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6718, 1995 WL 366722 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

John Fitzgerald appeals from judgments of conviction for first degree felony murder, armed robbery with a deadly weapon, burglary of an occupied dwelling, and grand theft of an automobile. We affirm.

The trial court properly denied the defense’s peremptory challenge of juror Beni-tez. The record indicates that the State had cause to object to the challenge as discriminatory and demand a Neil inquiry, and that the reasons given for the strike were pretex-tual. See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18, 22 (Fla.) (factors that may demonstrate pretext include perfunctory examination of challenged juror and proffered reason for challenge that is unrelated to facts of case), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219, 108 S.Ct. 2873, 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988).

We find no merit m the remaining points on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

John Fitzgerald appeals from judgments of conviction for first degree felony murder, armed robbery with a deadly weapon, burglary of an occupied dwelling, and grand theft of an automobile. We affirm.

The trial court properly denied the defense’s peremptory challenge of juror Beni-tez. The record indicates that the State had cause to object to the challenge as discriminatory and demand a Neil inquiry, and that the reasons given for the strike were pretex-tual. See State v. Slappy, 522 So.2d 18, 22 (Fla.) (factors that may demonstrate pretext include perfunctory examination of challenged juror and proffered reason for challenge that is unrelated to facts of case), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1219, 108 S.Ct. 2873, 101 L.Ed.2d 909 (1988).

We find no merit m the remaining points on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

658 So. 2d 565, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6718, 1995 WL 366722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fitzgerald-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack