Newkirk v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Newkirk v. State

779 So. 2d 627, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2447, 2001 WL 219108

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 7, 2001

DocketNo. 3D00-498

StatusPublished

This text of 779 So. 2d 627 (Newkirk 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

Newkirk v. State, 779 So. 2d 627, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2447, 2001 WL 219108 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from a final judgment of conviction and sentence for attempted second degree murder, resisting [628]*628an officer without violence, and carrying a concealed firearm. We affirm.

The trial court did not err in denying the peremptory challenges of venire members Neely and Nolan. The record reflects that the state gave race-neutral reasons for the exclusions and the trial court found the reasons to be genuine and not pretextual. See Greene v. State, 718 So.2d 334, 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (“The trial court’s decision on the ultimate issue of pretext ‘turns primarily on an assessment of credibility and will be affirmed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.’ ”) (quoting Melbourne v. State, 679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996)); see also Washington v. State, 773 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

We find no support in the record for the defendant’s contention that the trial court exceeded the boundaries of neutrality. The remainder of defendant’s points on appeal are without merit. See Lopez v. State, 555 So.2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Reyes v. State, 700 So.2d 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); see also Batista v. State, 685 So.2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from a final judgment of conviction and sentence for attempted second degree murder, resisting [628]*628an officer without violence, and carrying a concealed firearm. We affirm.

The trial court did not err in denying the peremptory challenges of venire members Neely and Nolan. The record reflects that the state gave race-neutral reasons for the exclusions and the trial court found the reasons to be genuine and not pretextual. See Greene v. State, 718 So.2d 334, 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (“The trial court’s decision on the ultimate issue of pretext ‘turns primarily on an assessment of credibility and will be affirmed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.’ ”) (quoting Melbourne v. State, 679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996)); see also Washington v. State, 773 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

We find no support in the record for the defendant’s contention that the trial court exceeded the boundaries of neutrality. The remainder of defendant’s points on appeal are without merit. See Lopez v. State, 555 So.2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Reyes v. State, 700 So.2d 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); see also Batista v. State, 685 So.2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

779 So. 2d 627, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2447, 2001 WL 219108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newkirk-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack