Fleckinger v. State

Appellant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.

We address only one issue. Appellant contends that the court’s excusing a prospective juror for cause during voir dire, after questioning by the court but without allowing defense counsel to examine the juror, mandates reversal under Green v. State, 575 So.2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). See also O’Connell v. State, 480 So.2d 1284 (Fla.1985); Francis v. State, 579 So.2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).

During voir dire, the trial court asked the prospective jurors if they had any religious reasons which would prevent them from serving. One woman responded as…