Baker v. State

Carlos Roberto Baker appeals convictions for burglary of an unoccupied conveyance, possession of burglary tools, and trespass in a conveyance. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

Contrary to Baker’s assertion, we find no error in the trial court’s denial of his peremptory challenge to prospective juror Reddick. See Melbourne v. State, 679 So.2d 759 (Fla.1996).

When read in context, the judge’s statement clearly indicates that he did not believe the proffered reason was genuine and that he was not going to change his ruling disallowing the peremptory strike. Immediately after saying this, the…