Deshommes v. Exalant

Full title: WALNER DESHOMMES, Appellant, v. MANNO EXALANT, Appellee.

Court: Florida Court of Appeals, Fourth District

Date published: Nov 2, 2022

No. 4D22-513 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Nov. 2, 2022)

Opinion

4D22-513

11-02-2022

WALNER DESHOMMES, Appellant, v. MANNO EXALANT, Appellee.

Lawrence R. Metsch of Metschlaw, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant. Vivian H. Fazio of Law Offices of Vivian H. Fazio, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and Michele K. Feinzig of Michele K. Feinzig, P.A., Coral Springs, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; John B. Bowman, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE20-11205.

Lawrence R. Metsch of Metschlaw, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.

Vivian H. Fazio of Law Offices of Vivian H. Fazio, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and Michele K. Feinzig of Michele K. Feinzig, P.A., Coral Springs, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See United States v. Schwartz, No. 19-20451, 2021 WL 5283948, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 12, 2021) ("All courts that have considered this question so far have universally reached the conclusion that a defendant can still assess a juror's credibility and demeanor during both voir dire and trial while the juror is wearing a face mask."); United States v. Trimarco, No. 17-CR-583 (JMA), 2020 WL 5211051, at *1, *5 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2020) (denying a motion for continuance "until some indeterminate time in the future" when safety measures ordered in response to the COVID-19 pandemic are lifted, and agreeing with the government that "there is no constitutional right that requires a defendant to see a juror's facial expression or allows him to communicate nonverbally with a juror.").

GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and FORST, JJ., concur.