STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
ROOSEVELT JONES, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1990-03-29
No. 73999
EHRLICH, C.J., and SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur., OVERTON, J., concurs in result only.
561 So. 2d 532 Florida Supreme Court (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

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.


Holding

A defendant's statutory right to a twelve-person jury in a first-degree murder trial can be validly waived by defense counsel in exchange for the state waiving the death penalty.


Facts & Procedural History

Defense counsel agreed to a six-person jury in exchange for the state waiving the death penalty in a first-degree murder case. The trial court proceed…

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.


Opinion of the Court
McDonald, justice.

McDonald, justice.

In Jones v. State, 548 So. 2d 244, 244 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), the district court certified the following question as one of great public importance:

Whether a twelve-person jury is required in a first degree murder case in which the prosecution waives the death penalty?

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. In State v. Griffith, 561 So. 2d 528 (Fla.1990), we answered the certified question with a qualified affirmative and held that, regardless of whether the state seeks the death penalty, a twelve-person jury is required in first-degree murder trials unless waived by the defense. In this case defense counsel’s agreement with the state to trial by a six-person jury in exchange for the state’s waiver of the death penalty constituted a valid waiver of Jones’s statutory right to trial by a twelve-person jury.* Griffith. We therefore quash the district court’s decision.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. OVERTON, J., concurs in result only.

*

The following exchange took place on the record.

MR. SOHN: [Defense Counsel]: It’s my understanding the State is waiving the death penalty. We have agreed to a jury of six. MR. NORRIS: [Prosecutor]: That’s correct, Judge.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Blair v. State, 698 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 1997)
    …ury in a capital case, where the State waives the right to seek the death penalty and the parties stipulate to the smaller jury. See State v. Mustelier, 561 So. 2d 533 (Fla.1990); State v. Rodriguez-Acosta, 561 So. 2d 531 (Fla.1990); State v. Jones, 561 So. 2d 532 (Fla.1990); State v. Enriquez, 572 So. 2d 515 (Fla.1990). In those cases we held that the waiver was effective even if counsel, rather than the defendant personally, waived the twelve-person jury on behalf of his client after consulting with him and…
  • Boynton v. State, 575 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
    …greement of counsel that the defendant appear in a live lineup, of which he was presumptively aware, Dumas v. State, 439 So. 2d 246, 249-52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 462 So. 2d 1105 (Fla.1985), and by which he was bound, see State v. Jones, 561 So. 2d 532 (Fla.1990), rendered his subsequent refusal to participate, contrary to the agreement, admissible against him as reflecting a consciousness of guilt under the doctrine stated in Herring v. State, 501 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).1 The appellant’s…
  • Cedrick Craft v. State, 685 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
    …s v. State, 616 So. 2d 444 (Fla.1993). For ground three, see Anderson v. State, 467 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. dismissed, 475 So. 2d 693 (Fla.1985). Finally, as to ground four, see State v. Griffith, 561 So. 2d 528 (Fla.1990) and State v. Jones, 561 So. 2d 532 (Fla.1990).…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw