Opinion ID: 1090506
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Misinterpretation of Voir Dire Responses

Text: Hoskins asserts that the State's reason is not genuine because the record does not support the prosecutor's and trial court's interpretations of Ms. Harp's voir dire responses. Specifically, in response to the trial court's request to provide a reason for the strike, the prosecutor stated that Ms. Harp had a godson serving a long-term prison sentence and had a number of other family members and friends who had been convicted, have been to prison. (Emphasis added.) Hoskins argues that the record does not support this claim because Ms. Harp actually stated that several family members and friends had been arrested and the State did not ask the length of her godson's prison sentence. We reject this argument. While the trial judge initially confused Ms. Harp's voir dire responses with those of another juror, counsel corrected him, and the trial judge asked the court reporter to read back Ms. Harp's questioning. Thus, to the extent the prosecutor misstated Ms. Harp's responses, the misstatement was corrected when the responses were read back verbatim. In addition, other than correcting the initial confusion regarding the testimony, the defense did not question the facts on which the strike was based, but argued only that other jurors also had convictions or contacts with the law. Therefore, the issue was not preserved. See, e.g., Rimmer v. State, 825 So.2d 304, 321 (Fla.2002) (The trial court . . . cannot be faulted for accepting the facial reason offered by the State, especially where the State's factual assertion went unchallenged by the defense.); Fotopoulos v. State, 608 So.2d 784, 788 (Fla.1992) ([The] claim that this reason is not supported by the record was not raised below and therefore has been waived.); Floyd v. State, 569 So.2d 1225, 1229 (Fla.1990) ([W]hen the state asserts a fact as existing in the record, the trial court cannot be faulted for assuming it is so when defense counsel is silent and the assertion remains unchallenged.).