Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Nicholas v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 28, 2010No. 2D07-5400Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWallace, Judge

During the voir dire examination at Nicholas’ trial, no one asked the members of the venire if they knew Nicholas or any of the prospective witnesses. The majority holds that one of the members of Nicholas’ jury committed misconduct by failing to volunteer that he was acquainted with Tamiko James and Nicholas. But a juror does not conceal information when the juror accurately answers the questions propounded to the juror during voir dire, and because the State failed to use due diligence in seeking the information, the juror was not guilty of misconduct.

For these reasons, I respectfully…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. State v. DiGuilioSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
  3. Wade v. HunterSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Crist v. BretzSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. De La Rosa v. ZequeiraSupreme Court of Florida · 1995

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API