Legal Opinion · Dissent

Norona v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 26, 2014No. 3D11-2306Published

1DissentLagoa, J.

On appeal, Norona argues that the trial court erred in refusing to allow the defense to exercise a peremptory challenge to excuse X.G. where the defense provided a gender — neutral and non-pretextual reason for the challenge. Because I believe the trial court erred when it disallowed Norona’s peremptory challenge to X.G. after defense counsel provided a genuine, race-neutral and gender-neutral reason for the challenge, I respectfully dissent.

The record reveals that after conducting voir dire on a panel of fifty prospective jurors, the parties began exercising cause and peremptory challenges…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Purkett v. ElemSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Melbourne v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1996
  3. Murray v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2009
  4. Davis v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
  5. Hayes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2012

8 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