Opinion
No. 03-KA-2425.
November 29, 2005.
would grant the rehearing in part for the limited purpose of deleting from the opinion the following statement, which is unnecessary to the proper resolution of the issues presented in this case:
In any event, defendant had two peremptory challenges remaining when he unsuccessfully challenged Louque for cause. He did not use one of his peremptory challenges on Louque, and therefore waived the alleged error. See, State v. Bourque, 622 So.2d at 229-230 (A defendant waives his right to complain about the denial of a cause challenge when he subsequently accepts the challenged juror although he has a remaining peremptory challenge).