Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

669 So. 2d 353

Docket No. 94-688.

Rozier v. State

Andre H. ROZIER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 13, 1996.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1996-03-13

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 2007

10 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The court reporters involved have certified that the notes from the voir dire portion of the trial are lost and accordingly, no transcript of that part of the trial was prepared. This court appointed the Honorable Gerald J. Klein as Commissioner to inquire into the circumstances. After conducting a hearing, Judge Klein reported that the voir dire transcription notes could not be located and that the voir dire portion of the trial could not be reconstructed. He therefore recommended that a new trial be awarded. The State argues that a sufficient record for appellate review can be obtained based on the trial minutes of jury selection. In this case peremptory challenges were exercised by both sides. We have carefully considered the State's argument, but conclude that the trial minutes do not contain sufficient detail to allow meaningful appellate review. We agree with the recommendation of Judge Klein, and order a new trial. See Fairell v. State, 662 So.2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Jackson v. State, 308 So.2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); see also Delap v. State, 350 So.2d 462 (Fla.1977).”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 902 So. 2d 166 - Vargas v. State

Relies on 350 So. 2d 462 - Delap v. State · Jackson v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-03-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Rosa C. Figarola, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Paulette R. Taylor, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

¶3Before NESBITT, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Andre H. Rozier appeals his convictions of burglary of a conveyance, grand theft, and possession of burglary tools. We vacate the convictions and remand for a new trial.

¶6The court reporters involved have certified that the notes from the voir dire portion of the trial are lost and accordingly, no transcript of that part of the trial was prepared. This court appointed the Honorable Gerald J. Klein as Commissioner to inquire into the circumstances. After conducting a hearing, Judge Klein reported that the voir dire transcription notes could not be located and that the voir dire portion of the trial could not be reconstructed. He therefore recommended that a new trial be awarded.

¶7The State argues that a sufficient record for appellate review can be obtained based on the trial minutes of jury selection. In this case peremptory challenges were exercised by both sides. We have carefully considered the State's argument, but conclude that the trial minutes do not contain sufficient detail to allow meaningful appellate review. We agree with the recommendation of Judge Klein, and order a new trial. See Fairell v. State, 662 S.2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Jackson v. State,308 So.2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); see also Delap v. State,350 So.2d 462 (Fla.1977).

¶8In the event that defendant is convicted upon retrial, we point out that any resentencing must be within the legal maximum. The State concedes that defendant's twelve-year sentences as a habitual offender exceed the applicable ten-year legal maximum for third degree felonies. See § 775.084, Fla.Stat. (1989).

¶9Reversed and remanded.

/669/so2d/353 · .json · Public domain