Background
Carlos Palmer was convicted and sentenced in Palm Beach County Circuit Court for attempted premeditated first-degree murder with a firearm.
Palmer appealed, raising three issues. One challenged the circuit court’s use of a six-person jury; the Fourth District did not describe the other two issues.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth District affirmed the use of a six-person jury under its longstanding precedent, citing Guzman v. State and the U.S. Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in Cunningham v. Florida.
The court noted that the U.S. Supreme Court had granted certiorari in Kian v. State, another case involving Florida’s jury practice, but nevertheless applied existing precedent. It affirmed Palmer’s remaining issues without discussion and upheld his conviction and sentence.
Key Takeaways
- Existing Fourth District precedent supported trying Palmer before a six-person jury.
- The pending U.S. Supreme Court review in Kian did not alter the result under controlling precedent.
- The court affirmed Palmer’s other appellate claims without a written analysis.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that, unless controlling law changes, the Fourth District will continue applying precedent permitting six-person juries in covered Florida criminal cases.
The court’s reference to Kian highlights that the issue remained under review by the U.S. Supreme Court when Palmer was decided.