Montgomery v. State

566 So. 2d 946, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7190, 1990 WL 136855
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Montgomery v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 615 So. 2d 226
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 21, 1990·No. No. 89-1524·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Montgomery challenges his convictions for burglary, sexual battery, kidnapping and aggravated assault because the trial court failed to conduct a Neil inquiry1 after the state exercised peremptory challenges to exclude prospective black jurors. We reverse.

The trial court did not conduct an adequate Neil hearing and did not have the benefit of Kibler v. State, 546 So.2d 710 (Fla.1989), and Torres v. State, 548 So.2d 660 (Fla.1989), where the supreme court overturned decisions denying white defendants standing to challenge the exclusion of black jurors. Since Montgomery possessed standing to request a Neil hearing, we reverse and remand for a new trial. See Eichelberger v. State, 562 So.2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

WENTWORTH, MINER and WOLF, JJ., concur.

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

Montgomery v. State, 566 So. 2d 946, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7190, 1990 WL 136855 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

566 So. 2d 946 (Montgomery v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Neil
457 So. 2d 481 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1984)
State v. Slappy
522 So. 2d 18 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1988)
Torres v. State
548 So. 2d 660 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
State v. Castillo
486 So. 2d 565 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Kibler v. State
546 So. 2d 710 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
Eichelberger v. State
562 So. 2d 853 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)