Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...We also know of no statutory or constitutional authority to support Thompson's second contention, that the state should be precluded from conducting voir dire of prospective grand jurors. Implicit in the statutory right to challenge individual prospective grand jurors, section 905.04, Florida Statutes (1987), is the opportunity to obtain information from them about their qualifications....

...After an indictment was returned the appellant moved to quash the indictment on several grounds, one of which was the judge's refusal of the requested voir dire examination. This also was denied. Appellant contends error was committed by denying these motions. This is not so. Section 905.04(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1977), provides that a person who has been held to answer may challenge an individual prospective grand juror on the ground that the juror has a state of mind that will *7 prevent him from acting impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party challenging....

...a grand juror, Teresita Herron, who was married to Major Robert G. Herron, head of the detective bureau within the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, which investigated the Kreusler homicide. The question appellant seeks to raise is whether or not section 905.04(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1977), disqualified [3] Mrs....

...Certain microscopic marks on the two spent cases eliminated a bolt action shotgun, a double-barrelled gun, or a single-barrelled gun. An automatic gun would have ejected the third shell casing. [2] Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). [3] Section 905.04 provides in pertinent part: (1) The state or a person who has been held to answer may challenge an individual prospective grand juror on the ground that the juror: (b) Has a state of mind that will prevent him from acting impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party challenging......

...1998)); TENN.CODE ANN. § 24-1-207 (2001)( State v. Middlebrooks, 840 S.W.2d 317 (Tenn.1992), superceded by statute on other grounds, State v. Stout, 46 S.W.3d 689 (Tenn. 2001)); Vt. Rule Evid. 503 ( State v. Percy, 149 Vt.623, 548 A.2d 408 (1988)); WIS. STAT. § 905.04 (2001) ( State v....

...The informations were dismissed as to all the appellees, because the trial court found that certain members of the Grand Jury panel were pre-disposed to return indictments against the appellees at the time they were impanelled and sworn, in violation of § 905.04, Fla.Stat., F.S.A....