Barnes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 28, 1992

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1992-01-28

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 1993

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Where the trial court finds that a peremptory challenge is based upon racial bias, is the sole remedy to dismiss the jury pool and start voir dire over with a new jury pool, or may the trial court exercise its discretion to deny the peremptory challenge if it cures the discriminatory taint; for example, must the jury panel be stricken if the discriminatory challenge has been made outside its presence?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 602 So. 2d 532 - State v. Barnes

Relies on Tillery v. State · Jefferson v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-01-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We reverse and remand for a new trial based on the authority of Wright v. State, 592 So.2d 1123 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). We certify the following question, as stated in Jefferson v. State, 584 So.2d 123 (Fla. 4th *1128DCA 1991), and Wright, as one of great public importance:

WHERE THE TRIAL COURT FINDS THAT A PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE IS BASED UPON RACIAL BIAS, IS THE SOLE REMEDY T,0 DISMISS THE JURY POOL AND START VOIR DIRE OVER WITH A NEW JURY POOL, OR MAY THE TRIAL COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO DENY THE PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE IF IT CURES THE DISCRIMINATORY TAINT; FOR EXAMPLE, MUST THE JURY PANEL BE STRICKEN IF THE DISCRIMINATORY CHALLENGE HAS BEEN MADE OUTSIDE ITS PRESENCE?

¶2In light of our decision, we do not need to reach the remaining points raised on appeal by the defendant.

¶3Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

¶4LEVY and GODERICH, JJ., concur.