Murray v. State
This text of 356 So. 2d 71 (Murray 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.
Opinion
Charles MURRAY, Jr., Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
*72 Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Janice G. Scott, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Michael H. Davidson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of the judgments and sentences for robbery and attempted robbery. Appellant urges the trial court committed reversible error and abused its discretion by prohibiting appellant from interviewing a member of the jury after the trial.
Following rendition of the verdict, the jury was polled, and each juror indicated that the verdict was his as well as that of the jury as a whole. Appellant sought to interview one juror because during the polling of the jury, this juror began crying. This fact does not constitute a reasonable basis for belief that the verdict of the jury may be subject to a legal challenge. Bullard v. State, 324 So.2d 652 (Fla. 1 DCA 1975). Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by prohibiting appellant from interviewing this juror.
Therefore, the judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.
MILLS, Acting C.J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
356 So. 2d 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murray-v-state-fladistctapp-1978.