BLAIR ALEXANDER TERRY v. STATE OF FLORIDA (2022)

Terry appeals his conviction and sentence, asserting that the trial court erred in granting the State's two challenges during jury selection. Appellant failed to preserve both claims; therefore, we affirm.

Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder by a twelve-person jury and sentenced to life in prison. During jury selection, while the parties were discussing for-cause challenges with the trial court, the State moved to strike a prospective juror because she could not be fair and impartial. Appellant's counsel objected and argued that the strike should not be granted because the potential juror was rehabilitated. The trial court granted the cause strike over objection.

While the parties were discussing peremptory challenges with the trial court, the State moved to strike another prospective juror. Appellant's counsel objected to the strike. The trial court granted the peremptory strike over objection.

The parties then accepted the jury of twelve people and one alternate. The Appellant stated that he was satisfied with the jury. The next day, Appellant's attorney again accepted the jury. The trial court then asked if there was anything else that needed to be discussed before bringing the jury in. The State and defense stated that they had nothing further to discuss. The jury was sworn, and the trial proceeded.

After the trial, Appellant moved for a new trial, claiming that the trial court erred by granting the peremptory strike. The trial court denied the motion.

Before an appellate court may review a voir dire challenge objection, the objection must be properly preserved. Carratelli v. State, 961 So. 2d 312, 319 (Fla. 2007); State v. Johnson, 295 So. 3d 710, 714 (Fla. 2020). To preserve an objection on a voir dire challenge, the objecting party must renew the objection before the jury is sworn. Carratelli, 961 So. 2d at 319. Here, Appellant's counsel objected immediately to both challenges. But after arguing both objections, Appellant's counsel accepted the jury without renewing the objections. Appellant, thus, failed to preserve the claims on appeal, because his counsel did not renew the objections before the jury was sworn.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, J.

KELSEY and LONG, JJ., concur.