Unanimous Jury Recommendations Targeted in Death Cases
Sen. Blaise Ingoglia recently filed a bill that would allow judges to sentence defendants to death based on the recommendations of eight out of 12 jurors.
February 01, 2023 at 01:47 PM
4 minute read
State and Local GovernmentWith backing from Gov. Ron DeSantis, Florida lawmakers could scrap a requirement that unanimous jury recommendations are needed before death sentences can be imposed.
Rep. Berny Jacques, R-Seminole, filed a bill (HB 555) on Tuesday that would allow judges to sentence defendants to death based on the recommendations of eight out of 12 jurors. Sen. Blaise Ingoglia, R-Spring Hill, filed an identical bill (SB 450) on Monday.
The proposed change came six years after lawmakers required unanimous jury recommendations in death cases after a ruling by the Florida Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court, with a newly conservative majority, reversed course in 2020, effectively allowing lawmakers to consider eliminating the unanimity requirement.
The issue also has gained political momentum in recent months after Nikolas Cruz, who murdered 17 people at Parkland's Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018, was sentenced to life in prison. That sentence came after the jury was not unanimous on recommending death.
"It is unconscionable that 'protest jurors' can deny justice to the families of victims of heinous crimes in our current system of unanimity," Ingoglia said in a statement Tuesday. "This is much needed reform to ensure that evil scumbags like Nikolas Cruz do not escape with just a life sentence."
DeSantis last week released a series of criminal-justice proposals for the upcoming legislation that included getting rid of the unanimity requirement. DeSantis called for using a "supermajority" requirement, meaning more than a 7-5 majority.
But eliminating the unanimity requirement likely would draw debate, with opponents pointing to issues such as cases in which death row inmates have been exonerated.
The issue involves the sentencing phase of capital cases, not the guilt phase, where juries are required to be unanimous to convict defendants.
Florida long allowed judges to impose death sentences based on majority jury recommendations. But that changed after major decisions in 2016 by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court.
In January 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Hurst v. Florida, ruled that the state's death-penalty system was unconstitutional because it gave too much authority to judges, instead of juries, in imposing death sentences.
To try to carry out the ruling, the Legislature quickly passed a measure that required 10-2 jury votes before death sentences could be imposed.
But in October 2016, in the similarly named case of Hurst v. State, the Florida Supreme Court interpreted and applied the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and said unanimous jury recommendations were required. The Legislature responded in 2017 by putting such a unanimous requirement in law.
After DeSantis took office in January 2019, however, he made appointments that created a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. In 2020, the court reversed course and said unanimous jury recommendations were not needed, though the unanimous requirement has remained in law.
"Last, lest there be any doubt, we hold that our state Constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment … does not require a unanimous jury recommendation—or any jury recommendation—before a death sentence can be imposed," the 2020 ruling shared by Justices Charles Canady and Ricky Polston said,
But Justice Jorge Labarga wrote a highly critical dissent, arguing that the majority "has taken a giant step backward and removed a significant safeguard for the just application of the death penalty in Florida."
"Today, a majority of this court recedes from the requirement that Florida juries unanimously recommend that a defendant be sentenced to death," Labarga wrote. "In doing so, the majority returns Florida to its status as an absolute outlier among the jurisdictions in this country that utilize the death penalty."
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readAs Unpredictability Rises, Gov't Law Practices Expect Trump Bump. Especially in Florida
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Sanctions Attorney for 'Frivolously' Claiming All Nine Personal Injury Categories in Motor Vehicle Case
- 2Second Judge Blocks Trump Federal Funding Freeze
- 3Crypto Hacker’s $65 Million Scam Ends in Indictment
- 4Trump's Inspectors General Purge Could Make Policy Changes Easier, Observers Say
- 5Supporting Our Supreme Court Justices in the Guardianship Part
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250