REED
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1986-11-10
No. 86-5211
479 U.S. 954 Supreme Court of the United States (1986) Negative Treatment
Cited by 23 cases
Dissent
Justice White,

Justice White,

dissenting.

In this case, the District Court permitted a 13th, alternate juror to participate in the jury’s deliberations, a procedure to which petitioner’s counsel stipulated. The 13 jurors unanimously found petitioner guilty.

On appeal, petitioner argued that the use of a 13-member jury violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 24(c), that the Rule is not waivable, and that even if it is, it can only be waived by a defendant personally and not by counsel. The Court of Appeals held that petitioner, through his counsel, had waived compliance with Rule 24(c).

It concluded that “[bjecause the waiver herein was neither prejudicial nor of constitutional magnitude and was made in the presence of the defendant in open court, . . . the failure to obtain appellant’s personal assent... , [if erroneous,] was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” 790 F. 2d 208, 211 (CA2 1986).

This decision conflicts with United States v. Virginia Erection Corp., 335 F. 2d 868, 870 (CA4 1964), which requires a defendant’s express and personal waiver of Rule 24(c), assuming that the Rule can be waived at all. See also United States v. Chatman, 584 F. 2d 1358 (CA4 1978) (explaining Virginia Erection as establishing a per se rule of plain error in cases where Rule 24(c) is violated without obtaining a defendant’s personal consent); United States v. Beasley, 464 F. 2d 468 (CA10 1972) (holding, in a case not involving an issue of waiver, that violations of Rule 24(c) are reversible per se, and approving the result in Virginia Erection).

I would grant certiorari to resolve this conflict.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

  • Taylor v. State, 583 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 1991)
    …o place another black on the jury. See Woods v. State, 490 So. 2d 24, 26 (Fla.) (three peremp-tories exercised by state against blacks did not rise to level needed to require trial court to inquire into state’s motives for challenges), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 954, 107 S.Ct. 446, 93 L.Ed.2d 394 (1986). The record does not reveal the requisite likelihood of discrimination to necessitate an inquiry into the state’s reasons for challenging juror Farragut. In support of his second contention, Taylor relies on T…
  • Robinson v. State, 610 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 1992)
    …own no abuse of discretion that would require reversal of the court’s decisions. Provenzano v. State, 497 So. 2d 1177 (Fla.1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1024, 107 S.Ct. 1912, 95 L.Ed.2d 518 (1987); Woods v. State, 490 So. 2d 24 (Fla.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 954, 107 S.Ct. 446, 93 L.Ed.2d 394 (1986). As we did with Coleman, we find no error in the trial court’s refusal to sever Robinson’s trial from his codefendants’. We also find no error in not severing out the conspiracy count because the offenses are…
  • Adams v. State, 559 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
    …not exercised solely because of the juror’s race. Adams failed to demonstrate that there was a strong likelihood that black prospective jurors were challenged solely on the basis of their race. See Woods v. State, 490 So. 2d 24 (Fla.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 954, 107 S.Ct. 446, 93 L.Ed.2d 394 (1986). The record does not reveal the requisite likelihood of discrimination to require an inquiry by the trial court. In fact, we find, just as the court did in Parker v. State, 476 So. 2d 134 (Fla.1985), that this…

Previewing 3 of 22 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw