Legal Opinion

Miller v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 6, 1995No. 95-1445Published

1Opinion of the Court

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The defendant’s conviction for grand theft from her employer is reversed for a new trial because of the erroneous disallowance of a defense peremptory challenge to a prospective juror. This result is required both because (a) the prosecutor’s simple declaration that the “state is requesting a neutral reason” after the strike was attempted was, without more,1 insufficient to trigger a Neil inquiry, see Windom v. State, 656 So.2d 432 (Fla.1995), cert, denied, — U.S. —, 116 S.Ct. 571, — L.Ed.2d — (U.S. Case no. *108395-6232, Dec. 4, 1995); State v. Johans, 613 So.2d 1319…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Windom v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1995
  2. State v. JohansSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  3. Portu v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  4. Cruz v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  5. Melbourne v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

2 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