Without comment, the United States Supreme Court refused to void an Arizona law that allows criminal defendants to be convicted and sentenced by juries of 8 people. Arizona is one of only a handful of states that allow juries of less than 12 members to convict a criminal defendant, with over 40 states refusing to allow the lesser number of jurors, particularly in felony cases.
At issue was A.R.S. 21-102, which states that the jury in any criminal case “shall consist of eight persons . . ..” The only exceptions, which appear in the same statute, are that a jury of twelve is necessary in a case where the defendant faces the death penalty, or imprisonment of 30 years or more.
There is some precedent for the court’s failure to void the Arizona law. In 1970, a criminal defendant was convicted of robbery by a six-member jury, as authorized by then applicable Florida law. On appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the number of jurors did not violate the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78 (1970).
In the current case, the high court refused this month even to review the law, with two justices dissenting. In one of the dissents, Justice Neil Gorsuch said that the 1970 Florida case was “was wrong the day it was decided, [and] remains wrong today.” He noted that the ruling was an aberration that essentially ignored centuries of understanding and precedent that required a jury of 12 in all criminal cases. Specifically, Justice Gorsuch stated that by the time the Sixth Amendment was adopted in the United States, the 12-member jury had been an institution in England with a 400-year history.
While the recent decision of the court is being applauded by prosecutors, time will tell the level of impact the 8-member jury will have in Arizona criminal cases.
Law Offices of David A. Black
40 North Central Avenue #1850
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(480) 280-8028