Background
Anthony J. Damiano was convicted and sentenced for fleeing to elude a law enforcement officer under section 316.1935(1), Florida Statutes (2023), in the County Court for Manatee County.
On appeal, Damiano raised one issue: whether his conviction by a six-person jury violated his constitutional rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment and sentence. It held that Damiano’s constitutional challenge lacked merit under controlling precedent, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Williams v. Florida and the Second District’s decision in Serrano-Delgado v. State.
The court noted that the U.S. Supreme Court had granted certiorari in Kian v. Florida to consider whether a defendant charged with a serious felony has a Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to a twelve-person jury. That pending review did not alter the precedent governing Damiano’s appeal.
Key Takeaways
- Binding precedent foreclosed Damiano’s claim that trial by a six-person jury violated his constitutional rights.
- The court affirmed Damiano’s conviction and sentence for fleeing to elude a law enforcement officer.
- The U.S. Supreme Court’s pending review of the jury-size issue in Kian v. Florida did not change the result under current law.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that Florida’s Second District continues to reject constitutional challenges to six-person criminal juries under existing precedent. Trial and appellate counsel should nevertheless monitor Kian, because the U.S. Supreme Court’s eventual ruling could affect future jury-size challenges.