Death is Different: The Need for Jury Unanimity in Death Penalty Cases

Authors

Raoul G. Cantero, Florida Supreme Court
Robert M. Kline

First Page

4

Document Type

Front Matter

Abstract

Florida requires jury unanimity in virtually all criminal trials. The only exception is death. In this sense, the maxim that "death is different" takes on ironic tones. In Florida, once the defendant is found guilty of a capital crime, the jury, after considering the aggravating and mitigating factors, recommends the sentence to the judge. The judge, however, ultimately imposes the sentence. Florida stands alone among thirty-five states in allowing a simple majority of the jury both to decide whether the prosecution proved an aggravating circumstance and to recommend a sentence of death. Both legal and policy grounds suggest that more than a simple majority should be required. Florida should change its capital sentencing scheme to require that a jury unanimously find an aggravator. Part II of this Article explores the contours of Florida's capital sentencing scheme and focuses on the portion of the Florida Statutes that authorizes a mere majority of the jury to determine the existence of an aggravator. Part III examines capital sentencing schemes across the country to determine whether Florida's scheme is typical of those in other States. Part IV then explores Supreme Court precedent on capital sentencing schemes to determine whether the United States Constitution requires a state to determine aggravators unanimously. Finally, in Part V, after exploring historical and policy reasons behind the requirement that only unanimous juries render verdicts, the authors recommend that the Florida Legislature revisit its death penalty statute to require unanimous juries find the prosecution proved an aggravator.

Recommended Citation

Raoul G. Cantero & Robert M. Kline, Death is Different: The Need for Jury Unanimity in Death Penalty Cases, 22 St. Thomas L. Rev. 4 (2009).
Available at: https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol22/iss1/3