Background
Walter F. Brown was convicted after a jury trial of possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver. The Sarasota County Circuit Court sentenced him to sixty-four months in prison followed by two years of probation.
Brown appealed, challenging the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and arguing that the trial court fundamentally erred by trying his noncapital case before a six-person jury. He asserted that Florida’s six-person-jury statute was facially unconstitutional.
The Court’s Holding
The Second District affirmed Brown’s judgment and sentence. It found no merit in his challenge to the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and did not further discuss that issue.
The court also held that Brown failed to show error, much less fundamental error, from being tried by a six-person jury. It relied on Williams v. Florida, which held that Florida’s use of six-person juries does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendments, and noted that Williams remains binding precedent.
Key Takeaways
- Florida’s use of a six-person jury in a noncapital criminal case did not constitute fundamental error.
- Williams v. Florida remains binding precedent on the constitutionality of six-person juries.
- The court affirmed Brown’s conviction and sentence in full.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that Florida intermediate appellate courts remain bound by Williams in challenges to six-person juries for noncapital offenses. Defendants raising that argument cannot establish fundamental error on the present law.