Opinion ID: 1691877
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Challenge to Venire

Text: Richardson cites Craig v. State, 583 So.2d 1018 (Fla.1991), for the proposition that the venire from which his jury was selected represents an unconstitutional jury districting system. His claim is without merit. In Craig, we found the jury districting system in Palm Beach County unconstitutional based on our earlier decision in Spencer v. State, 545 So.2d 1352 (Fla.1989). 583 So.2d at 1019. In Spencer, we reviewed the administrative order creating jury districts within the county, finding that: The effect of the administrative order is that a black defendant charged with a crime in the predominantly white West Palm Beach district must be tried in that jury district, while a white defendant charged with a crime in the predominantly black western district has a choice of being tried in the predominantly white West Palm Beach district or in the predominantly black Glades district. That procedure of allowing a choice in one district but not in the other violates equal protection.... 545 So.2d at 1355. We conclude that no comparable equal protection violation exists in this case. On the contrary, Volusia County draws its potential jurors from voter registration lists, a practice approved by this Court. See Hendrix v. State, 637 So.2d 916 (Fla.1994); Bryant v. State, 386 So.2d 237 (Fla.1980). Accordingly, the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying Richardson's challenge to the venire.