Troy Lessard v. State of Florida
15-5300
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Dec 12, 2017Background
- Troy Lessard was convicted of capital sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation and received life sentences; he appealed raising for the first time a claim that Florida’s use of six-member juries for life felonies is unconstitutional.
- Florida statutorily uses six-person juries for non-capital criminal cases and twelve for capital cases; Florida is effectively unique in using six jurors for life-felony (non-capital) cases.
- Lessard asked for retreat from State v. Hogan and a retrial before a twelve-member jury, citing modern empirical studies criticizing Williams v. Florida.
- The panel reviewed Supreme Court precedent establishing the “functional” approach permitting six-member juries (Williams) and subsequent decisions addressing unanimity and minimum jury size (Apodaca, Ballew, Burch).
- Florida appellate and supreme-court precedent (Hogan, Gonzalez, Hall) has consistently rejected a federal constitutional right to a twelve-member jury in life-felony prosecutions; this court declined to certify the question to the Florida Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Williams v. Florida should be overruled so that 12-member juries are required for life felonies | Lessard: Williams was wrongly decided; modern empirical evidence shows smaller juries harm accuracy, minority representation, and raise wrongful conviction risk; he seeks 12-member jury retrial | State: Williams remains controlling federal precedent; no federal constitutional bar to six-member juries; Florida precedent also authorizes six-person juries for life felonies | Court: Rejected Lessard’s request; Williams controls and state precedent stands; no relief granted |
| Whether Lessard is entitled to a new trial by a 12-member jury under Florida law | Lessard: Legislative and empirical reasons justify six→twelve change; Hogan should be overruled | State: Florida courts and statutes permit six-member juries; change is a legislative or U.S. Supreme Court matter | Court: Denied; state precedent (Hogan, Gonzalez) remains binding; legislature or U.S. Supreme Court, not this court, should effect change |
| Whether this court should certify to the Florida Supreme Court the question of requiring 12 jurors for certain life offenses | Lessard: Empirical developments warrant certification | State: No federal constitutional error; prior certification requests were denied; not compelling now | Court: Declined to certify (similar question previously rejected in Hall); certification not warranted |
| Institutional allocation of decisionmaking on jury size (judiciary vs legislature vs U.S. Supreme Court) | Lessard: Court should revisit Hogan given new evidence | State: Jury-size policy is primarily legislative; U.S. Supreme Court controls federal constitutional standard | Court: Emphasized that change belongs to Legislature or U.S. Supreme Court; appellate court declined to overturn existing precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78 (upheld six-person juries in state criminal cases)
- Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (right to jury trial incorporated against states)
- Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (plurality upholding nonunanimous verdicts in some state juries)
- Ballew v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 223 (invalidated five-person juries; questioned functional approach)
- Burch v. Louisiana, 441 U.S. 130 (reversed nonunanimous six-person jury conviction; drew lines under functional test)
- State v. Hogan, 451 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 1984) (Florida precedent holding 12 jurors not required for certain ‘‘capital’’ sexual-battery cases)
- Gonzalez v. State, 982 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (noting Florida’s anomaly and declining to require 12 jurors for life felonies)
- Hall v. State, 853 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (denying certification on whether 12-person jury required where death penalty unavailable)