BROWN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida's use of a six-person jury for noncapital criminal cases does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendment and does not constitute fundamental error.
[1] Florida's statutory provision authorizing six-person juries for noncapital criminal cases does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendment and does not constitute funda…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 86 (Fla. 1970), the United States Supreme Court held that Florida's use of a six-person jury does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that no historical evidence shows that a twelve-person jury was an indispensable component of the Sixth Amendment or that the Framers intended to require a twelve-person jury.”
Court's explanation of binding precedent supporting the constitutionality of six-person juries in noncapital cases
Walter Brown was convicted by a six-person jury of possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver following a jury trial in Sarasota County. He …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury Trial Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
WALTER F. BROWN, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 2D2025-2204
September 25, 2026
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County; Donna M. Padar, Judge.
Blair Allen, Public Defender, and Megan Banfield, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison C. Heim, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
SLEET, Judge.
Walter Brown appeals from his judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver. Brown was convicted following a jury trial, and he was sentenced to sixty-four months' imprisonment followed by two years' probation. We affirm.
Brown first argues on appeal that the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. We find no merit to this argument and comment on it no further.
Brown also argues on appeal that the trial court committed fundamental error by allowing him to be tried for a noncapital offense using a six-person jury.1 He maintains that section 913.10, Florida Statutes—which provides that "[t]welve persons shall constitute a jury to try all capital cases, and six persons shall constitute a jury to try all other criminal cases"—is unconstitutional on its face. We conclude that Brown has failed to demonstrate any error, let alone fundamental error, with regard to this argument. See Serrano-Delgado v. State, 392 So. 3d 251, 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024) ("In Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 86 (Fla. 1970), the United States Supreme Court held that Florida's use of a six-person jury does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that no historical evidence shows that a twelveperson jury was an indispensable component of the Sixth Amendment or that the Framers intended to require a twelve-person jury. Williams is binding precedent and 'indisputably remains good law.' " (citation omitted) (quoting Simpson v. State, 368 So. 3d 513, 520 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023) (Pratt, J., concurring))); see also Jack v. State, 349 So. 3d 925, 927 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) ("[N]o fundamental error occurred when [a]ppellant was tried and convicted by a six-person jury on noncapital charges."). Affirmed.
NORTHCUTT and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78 (U.S. 1970)
- Hamed Kian v. State, 421 So. 3d 439 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
- Serrano-Delgado v. State, 392 So. 3d 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024)
- Simpson v. State, 368 So. 3d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)