Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

421 So. 2d 1082

Docket No. 82-186.

Denham v. State

Daniel DENHAM and Georald Denham, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 1, 1982.

Rehearing Denied December 9, 1982.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1982-09-01

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 1986

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“`Backstriking' or back-challenging should not be prohibited by a trial court.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 429 So. 2d 758 - Grant v. State

Relies on Knee v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1982-09-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Craig S. Dyer of Shaffner, Shaffner & Dyer, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Andrea T. Mohel, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Appellants were convicted of attempted murder and possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. We affirm.

¶5After a review of the briefs and record, we find the points urged on appeal lacking in merit. Appellants contend they were improperly prevented from exercising a "back-strike" against a prospective juror. We find that this issue was not properly preserved for appeal but in passing note that prospective jurors may be challenged at any time before the jury is sworn to try the case. See Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.310 and Knee v. State, 294 So.2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). "Backstriking" or back-challenging should not be prohibited by a trial court. The appellants' convictions are hereby affirmed.

¶6AFFIRMED.

¶7DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and BERANEK, JJ., concur.

/421/so2d/1082 · .json · Public domain