Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...e prosecutor made in the guilt phase closing arguments. [4] We address each of these issues in turn. CHANGE OF VENUE The indictment in this case alleged that the murders occurred in either Pinellas County or Hillsborough County, Florida. Pursuant to section 910.03(1), Florida Statutes (1993), Chandler initially elected to be tried in Hillsborough County....

...e to determine if the parties could reach an agreement to conduct the trial in Pinellas County. Pursuant to a new law, the trial court had the option of picking a jury from another county and bringing the jurors to Pinellas County for the trial. See § 910.03(3), Fla....

...In Florida it is embedded in both the organic law and the statutes. Section 11, Bill of Rights, Florida Constitution, F.S.A., ordains that "[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to a * * * trial, by an impartial jury, in the county where the crime was committed * * *." Section 910.03, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides that "[i]n all criminal prosecutions the trial shall be in the county where the offense was committed unless otherwise provided by law." As stated by the 1st District Court in Rhoden v....

...ation may charge venue in two or more counties conjunctively and proof that the crime was committed in that area shall be sufficient; but before pleading the accused may elect in which of those counties he will be tried." Art. I, § 16, Fla. Const.; § 910.03, F.S....

...electing five jurors). III. Read literally, the Florida Constitution unequivocally guarantees a criminal defendant the right to stand trial in the county in which the crime of which he is accused allegedly transpired. The concurring opinion suggests section 910.03, Florida Statutes (1997), can be read as reflecting a legislative view that the defendant's constitutional right to stand trial in the county in which the offense is alleged to have taken place is absolute....

...The statute at issue in the line of cases from Hewitt to Higginbotham has long since been repealed. Unlike the statute *1065 the supreme court was construing in these early cases, the present statute contains no provision for a change of venue over the defendant's objection. Section 910.03(1), Florida Statutes (1995) states in material part that "criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed." [9] The statute goes on to say that the defendant can waive this right by moving to change venue to another county. Like the constitutional provision it was designed to implement, section 910.03(1), provides a clear and unambiguous statement of the applicable rule. The court must conduct the trial in the county where the crime was committed unless the defendant waives the protections afforded by Article I, section 16 by moving to transfer venue. This construction of the substantive provisions of section 910.03(1), Florida Statutes is supported by the statutory remedy provided in the event that it is impossible to seat a jury in the county where the crime was committed. Section 910.03(3), Florida Statutes (1995) states that "[i]f a court finds that a fair and impartial jury cannot be impaneled in the county where the offense was committed" and if the jurors are to be sequestered, the court may "select a jury from a...

...pted the expensive and cumbersome procedure of importing sequestered jurors from another county. The judicial branch could create an exception to the rights afforded to a criminal defendant under Article I, section 16 of the Florida Constitution and section 910.03, Florida Statutes only if those rights were in conflict with the constitutional rights of another party....

...Hewitt, but they were repealed by an act of the Legislature in 1970. See Fla. Laws Ch. 70-339 § 180 (1970). In 1971, the Legislature enacted a new criminal venue statute which did not contain a provision for change of venue by *1066 the state. See § 910.03 Fla. Stat. (1971). [11] Even if rule 3.240 could be construed to allow a motion for change of venue on the state's motion, that part of the rule would not take precedence over the conflicting provisions of the current venue statute. Section 910.03, Florida Statutes (1995), provides that "criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed," and, unlike the statutes in existence before 1970, it does not contain any provision that would allow for a change of venue on the state's motion....

...o other rights of fair trial set forth in Article I, Section 16(a), to wit: speedy trial [14] and public trial. [15] Thus, constitutional rights are properly the subject of procedural rules adopted by the Florida Supreme Court. [16] Florida Statutes section 910.03, cited in the majority and concurring opinions, applies where the place of the crime is unknown. [17] Section 910.03 does not refer to the State's right to request a change of venue....

...encountered in Mr. Sailor's case. These prospective jurors were instead simply released once juries were seated for the circuit civil and county court cases. [2] Of one hundred fifty-five jurors summoned for jury duty, only fifty-eight appeared. [3] Section 910.03, Florida Statutes (1997) does not prohibit state motions for change of venue....

...But subsection three authorizes a trial court seating a jury that is to be sequestered, when "a fair and impartial jury cannot be impaneled in the county where the offense was committed" to select a jury outside the county to "be brought for trial to the county where the offense was committed." § 910.03(3), Fla....

...However, the court did not apply the statute against the defendant, because it found the exception inapplicable under the facts of the case. [9] The statute contains an exception which allows the defendant to plead guilty or nolo contendere in another county, see § 910.035, Fla. Stat. (1995), but it does not contain any exception that would authorize the court to conduct a criminal trial in another county. [10] The courts have not addressed the constitutionality of the remedy provision in section 910.03(3), Florida Statutes (1995), and this opinion should not be construed as a comment on that issue. The statute is cited here only to show that the Legislature must have been aware of the limitations imposed by Article I, section 16. [11] Section 910.03, Florida Statutes (1971) provides that "criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed, but if the county is not known, the accused may be charged in two or more counties conjunctively and before tri...

...affidavit setting forth the necessity for such change. See Black's Law Dictionary 595, 752 (6th ed.1990). [14] Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.191 and 3.251. [15] Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.251. [16] See Commentary, 33 Fla. Stat. Ann. v (West 1975). [17] Florida Statutes section 910.03(3), allowing the selection of a jury from another county, was not asserted below and is not an issue here....

...State, 457 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1030, 105 S.Ct. 2051, 85 L.Ed.2d 324 (1985); State v. Katz, 417 So.2d 716 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), rev. denied, 429 So.2d 6 (Fla. 1983). [12] See Martin v. State, 488 So.2d 653 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). [13] Section 910.03 would have authorized this trial in Seminole County for the burglary in Volusia County, because the burglary was part of a criminal episode which partly took place in Seminole County. The problem with relying on section 910.03 is that the information in this case did not allege the burglary took place in Volusia County....

...ounty. Over State objection, the Palm Beach circuit court granted the defendant’s motion and issued an order transferring venue to Miami-Dade County and consolidating the Palm Beach County charges with the Miami-Dade County charges. LEGAL ANALYSIS Section 910.03(1), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that “Except as provided in s. 910.035 or in subsection (2), criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed.......

...k a change in venue. For example, if the State is unsure which county the offense was committed, it may charge the defendant in two or more counties conjunctively, and before trial the defendant may elect the county in which he or she will be tried. § 910.03(1); see also Art....

...sed may elect in which of these counties the trial will take place). Or, if the court determines that the defendant cannot receive a fair and impartial trial in the county where the offense was committed, the defendant may request a change in venue. § 910.03(3)....

...he is being held, and if the prosecuting attorney in the jurisdiction where the charges are pending approves in writing, the information or indictment may be transmitted to the county where the defendant is being held to allow him to enter his plea. § 910.035(1)....

...nd Evan Berlin as co-counsel to assist Zinober. See id. at 796. Although initially Chandler elected to be tried in Hillsborough County, see Dkt. 19, App. A, Vol. 5 at 621-22, as discussed infra the parties reached an agreement pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 910.03(1) (1993) to conduct the trial in Pinellas County where a jury picked from Orange County would be sequestered....

...enire pool was tainted by pretrial publicity is in order. In rejecting this claim, the Florida Supreme Court stated: The indictment in this case alleged that the murders occurred in either Pinellas County or Hillsborough County, Florida. Pursuant to section 910.03(1), Florida Statutes (1993), Chandler initially elected to be tried in Hillsborough County....

...e to determine if the parties could reach an agreement to conduct the trial in Pinellas County. Pursuant to a new law, the trial court had the option of picking a jury from another county and bringing the jurors to Pinellas County for the trial. See § 910.03(3), Fla....

...Chandler has not met. Chandler's claim is further belied by the ease with which the jury was actually seated. Chandler executed a Change of Venue Election advising the trial court that he wished to change his election of venue pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 910.03 from Hillsborough County to Pinellas County, see Dkt....

...ction for other crimes that they were not qualified as jurors. The appellant presents no authority for his statement that a knowledge of a prior conviction disqualifies a juror. We do not think that reason supports such a contention. Florida Statute § 910.03, F.S.A....

...t of Appeal does not have jurisdiction and that this appeal must be transferred to the First District Court of Appeal.  The Appellant Roy Allen Stephens was indicted in Polk County, and he elected venue in Hamilton County pursuant to section 910.03(1), Florida Statutes (2016), and article I, section 16, of the Florida Constitution....

...State, 457 So.2d 1012 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1030 , 105 S.Ct. 2051 , 85 L.Ed.2d 324 (1985); State v. Katz, 417 So.2d 716 (Fla. 2d DCA1982), review denied, 429 So.2d 6 (Fla.1983). . See Martin v. State, 488 So.2d 653 (Fla. 1st DCA1986). . Section 910.03 would have authorized this trial in Seminole County for the burglary in Volu-sia County, because the burglary was part of a criminal episode which partly took place in Seminole County. The problem with relying on section 910.03 is that the information in this case did not allege the burglary took place in Volusia County....

...prohibit the lower court from proceeding to trial in Duval County. He argues that once venue is alleged in an indictment conjunctively (in more than one county), his right to be tried in the county of his choice is guaranteed by Sections 910.02 and 910.03, Florida Statutes, and by Article I, Section 16 of the Florida Constitution....

...The trial court issued an order denying the motion for change of venue, and Martin thereupon filed the instant petitions in this court. While conceding that Section 910.-05, Florida Statutes, gives the state the right to file an indictment in Duval County, petitioner argues that Sections 910.02 and 910.03, Florida Statutes, and Article I, Section 16 of the Florida Constitution require a defendant to be given the right to elect venue upon its being alleged conjunctively in an indictment....

...Neither is common law certiorari the proper remedy, as the petitioner has failed to demonstrate “a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.” Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93, 96 (Fla.1983). The petitioner’s reliance on sections 910.02 and 910.03 and on Article I, Section 16 of the Florida Constitution is misplaced....

...own in which county the offense was committed, the accused may be tried in any county through which the railroad car, vehicle, watercraft or aircraft has traveled. The accused is entitled to elect the county in which he will be tried, as provided in s. 910.03. Section 910.03, Florida Statutes, states: Except as provided in s. 910.035 criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed; but if the county is not known, the accused may be charged in two or more counties conjunctively, and before trial the accused may elect the county in which he will be tried....

...See §§ 47.011, .021, .051-061; see also § 47.122 ("For the convenience of the parties or witnesses or in the interest of justice, any court of record may transfer any civil action to any other court of record in which it might have been brought.") (emphasis added). A different statute, section 910.03, Florida Statutes (2010), covers venue in criminal trials....

...It is well established that venue is a privilege that can be waived. Lane v. State, 388 So.2d 1022, 1026 (Fla.1980). When a defendant requests and obtains a change of venue, he waives the right to be tried in the transferring county even if this was where the crime was committed. See § 910.03(1) ("By his or her election, the accused waives the right to trial in the county in which the crime was committed....

...ctment or information may charge venue in two or more counties conjunctively and proof that the crime was committed in that area shall be sufficient; but before pleading the accused may elect in which of those counties he will be tried.” Moreover, section 910.03, Florida Statutes (1995), adds to the constitutional provision that: “Except as provided in s. 910.035 or in subsection (2), criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed; but if the county is not known, the accused may be charged in two or more counties conjunctively, and before trial the accused may elect the county in which he will be tried....

...In those truly rare occasions when it is necessary for a lawyer to convey at once the idea of combined conjunctiveness and disjunctiveness there are other ways in the English language for legal writers to do so. In this case, it would have been quite proper for the state to have alleged, as the constitution and section 910.03 plainly permit, that the crime occurred in “Okeechobee and Martin County.” If defendant did not like the prosecutor’s choice of venue, he had a complete remedy under section 910.03 by merely filing an election of Martin County. We agree with the state in its contention that the constitution and section 910.03(1) save its conjunctive choice of Okeechobee and Martin County for the sexual battery prosecution....

...The State argues that the Broward case charged conduct different from that committed in Dade County. Based on our review, the trial court’s consolidation and *278 effective change of venue from Broward to Dade County constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law resulting in irreparable harm. See § 910.03,....

...ty and circuit courts within the judicial circuit in which the State Attorney holds office.”). The general rule of venue for criminal cases is that “criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed.” § 910.03(1), Fla....

...ty and circuit courts within the judicial circuit in which the State Attorney holds office.”). The general rule of venue for criminal cases is that “criminal prosecutions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed.” § 910.03(1), Fla....

...concerns “the place where a trial may be held.” Smith v. United States, 599 U.S. 236, 245 (2023). 18 1939. Ch. 19554, §§ 160–69, Laws of Fla. (1939). The venue statutes are currently in Chapter 910. See § 910.03(1), Fla....