Opinion ID: 1103987
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Court's Examination.

Text: ¶ 39. This Court has already addressed on Bell's direct appeal his contention that the voir dire of the jury at his trial was so flawed as to be meaningless and that as a result the jury was excessively weighed in favor of the prosecution and that the flaws were due to leading questions suggesting to the jurors the proper answers, his failure to conduct meaningful individual examination of the panel members, and his reliance upon the members' self-assessment of their ability to give Bell a fair trial. Bell, 725 So.2d at 844 ¶ 9. Although no objections were made at the time or in post-trial motions, we examined the issue and held: We have also examined the record of the voir dire by the trial court as to any possible plain error, and although we cannot say that the manner of examining the jury was desirable, its defects do not rise to the level of fundamental constitutional error. Id. at 844 ¶ 11. ¶ 40. Because this issue was already addressed on direct appeal, an evidentiary hearing is unnecessary on this issue. Further, this issue is without merit. Not only has Bell failed to show that the performance of trial counsel was deficient, there has been no showing that the jury empaneled was not fair and impartial.