McCants v. State
210 So. 3d 130, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 13928
Opinion
For the reasons set forth in Ivy v. State, 196 So.3d 394, (Fla. 2d DCA 2016), we affirm. Again, we certify the following question of great public importance to the supreme court:
DURING A MELBOURNE V. STATE, 679 So.2d 759, 763 (Fla.1996), HEARING, WHEN A TRIAL COURT FINDS THAT THE PROPONENT’S REASON FOR A PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE IS FACIALLY NEUTRAL, IS IT THE BURDEN OF THE OPPONENT (1) TO CLAIM THE REASON IS A PRETEXT, (2) TO PLACE INTO THE RECORD THE CIRCUMSTANCES SUPPORTING ITS POSITION, AND (3) TO OBJECT IF THE TRIAL COURT’S RULING DOES NOT CONTAIN ADEQUATE FINDINGS ON THE ISSUE OF GENUINENESS?
Affirmed; question certified.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
McCants v. State, 210 So. 3d 130, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 13928 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).
210 So. 3d 130 (McCants 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)
Ivy v. State
196 So. 3d 394 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)