Luis A. Vega v. State of Florida, 182 So. 3d 848

Appellant was convicted of burglary after a jury trial and preserved an objection when the trial court denied a for-cause challenge to a prospective juror.
During voir dire defense counsel asked whether jurors would automatically credit police testimony because of their profession.
The challenged juror said repeatedly he would "tend" to find a police officer more credible than a lay witness and that his "first judgment on the street would be to say, oh, the cop is probably telling the truth."
After judicial rehabilitation the juror stated he could follow the court’s instructions and give equal credibility in court, but emphasized "I think I can do that," not an unequivocal commitment.
The trial court denied the challenge for cause; the defense expended a peremptory strike on the juror; appellant was convicted and appealed, arguing the denial of the for-cause strike was error.

Issue	State's Argument	Appellant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by denying a challenge for cause to a juror who said he would tend to believe police more than lay witnesses	Juror was rehabilitated by assurances he could follow instructions and weigh credibility equally; deny strike	Juror repeatedly stated he would give police greater credibility; assurances were equivocal and did not dispel reasonable doubt about impartiality	Reversed: juror should have been excused for cause because reasonable doubt remained

Matarranz v. State, 133 So.3d 473 (Fla. 2013) (trial-court inquiry evaluated by considering all juror responses; assurances not dispositive)
Juede v. State, 837 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (juror statements favoring police credibility support excusal; rehabilitation not always controlling)
Banks v. State, 46 So.3d 989 (Fla. 2010) (trial-court evaluation must consider all questions and answers posed to juror)
Reid v. State, 972 So.2d 298 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (close cases on juror impartiality should be resolved by excusing juror)
Slater v. State, 910 So.2d 347 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (juror who credits police testimony as "a little more weight" should be excused)