From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNichols v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 19, 1973
279 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

Opinion

No. 72-892.

June 19, 1973.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Dade County; Alfonso C. Sepe, Judge.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender and Mark King Leban, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and William L. Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and PEARSON and CHARLES CARROLL, JJ.


The appellant has alleged prejudicial error in his trial because of the trial judge's refusal to allow a question to prospective jurors on voir dire examination. He relies upon the holding of the Supreme Court of Florida in Pinder v. State, 27 Fla. 370, 8 So. 837 (1891), and the rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States in Aldridge v. United States, 283 U.S. 308, 51 S.Ct. 470, 75 L.Ed. 1054 (1931), and Ham v. South Carolina, 409 U.S. 524, 93 S.Ct. 848, 35 L.Ed.2d 46 (1973).

The State has confessed error and waived oral argument. We have examined the record before us and find that the cited authorities are applicable. We therefore reverse the judgment and sentence and remand the cause for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

McNichols v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 19, 1973
279 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)
Case details for

McNichols v. State

Case Details

Full title:ZEBEDEE McNICHOLS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 19, 1973

Citations

279 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

Citing Cases

Ross v. Ristaino

Other state cases suggest any black criminal defendant, target or not, who requests a specific inquiry about…