Background
David Lang Oakes appealed his convictions and consecutive life sentences for sexual battery of a child under twelve and lewd and lascivious molestation. His primary argument on appeal was that he was entitled to a twelve-person jury rather than the six-person jury that tried his case. He argued this entitlement arose on two grounds: (1) because sexual battery of a child under twelve is classified as a “capital felony” under section 794.011(2)(a), Florida Statutes, even though the death penalty was not available for his offense; and (2) because the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution require a twelve-person jury.
The defendant acknowledged that the death penalty was not available for his offense prior to the 2023 amendment to section 794.011(2)(a), but argued that because the statute classifies the offense as “capital,” a twelve-member jury was constitutionally mandated.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth DCA affirmed on all issues. Relying on State v. Hogan, 451 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 1984), the court held that sexual battery of a child, “while still defined as a capital crime by the legislature, is not capital in the sense that a defendant might be put to death,” and therefore a twelve-person jury is not required. Because Oakes committed his offenses before the 2023 amendment that made death a possible penalty for capital sexual battery, the pre-amendment framework controlled—and under that framework, a six-member jury was constitutionally sufficient.
The court also rejected the defendant’s federal constitutional arguments, finding that the Sixth Amendment does not require a twelve-person jury for non-death-penalty offenses under current U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The court cited its own recent decision in Koonce v. State, 425 So. 3d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025), which reached the same conclusion for crimes committed prior to the 2023 amendment.
Key Takeaways
- Florida’s classification of an offense as a “capital felony” does not automatically entitle a defendant to a twelve-person jury if the death penalty is not actually available as a sentence for that offense.
- For sexual battery offenses committed before the 2023 amendment to section 794.011(2)(a), a six-person jury remains constitutionally sufficient because death was not a possible punishment.
- The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments do not independently require a twelve-person jury for non-death cases under current U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
Why It Matters
This case resolves an issue arising from the 2023 legislative amendment that made the death penalty available for capital sexual battery of a child. For offenses committed before the amendment’s effective date, the pre-amendment jury-size rules apply. Criminal defense practitioners should note that the twelve-person jury argument is foreclosed for pre-2023 offenses under both state and federal constitutional theories. However, the opinion implicitly confirms that post-2023 offenses where death is actually sought would require a twelve-person jury—creating a potential bifurcation in procedures depending on offense date.