Richardson v. State
Richardson appealed his convictions arguing the trial court erred in denying his Melbourne/Batson challenges to the State's peremptory strikes of two African American female jurors. The Fifth DCA affirmed, holding that although Richardson challenged whether the State's reasons were race-neutral (step 2), he never challenged the genuineness of those reasons or requested a ruling on genuineness (step 3), as required by State v. Johnson, and therefore failed to preserve the issue for appellate review.
Key facts
- Richardson was convicted in trial court and appealed, challenging the trial court's denial of his Batson/Melbourne objections to the State's peremptory strikes of two African American female jurors.
- Richardson argued the State's stated reasons for striking the jurors were not race-neutral, but did not argue the reasons were not genuine or request a trial court ruling on genuineness.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion provides a clear, concrete illustration of how the Florida Supreme Court's preservation rule in State v. Johnson applies in practice, showing exactly what type of objection is insufficient to preserve a… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.