Drinkard v. State of Florida

Summary

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed Justin Drinkard’s murder and trespassing convictions. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a post-verdict interview of a juror who failed to disclose a misdemeanor reckless-driving conviction and that the Sixth Amendment did not require a twelve-person jury in this noncapital case.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Drinkard's motion to interview Juror 105 because Drinkard failed to make a prima facie showing that the juror's nondisclosed misdemeanor conviction was relevant and material to jury service in his case.
2. The Sixth Amendment does not require a twelve-person jury in a noncapital Florida criminal trial; the trial court therefore properly denied Drinkard's request for a twelve-person jury.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Drinkard's post-verdict motion to interview a juror who allegedly failed to disclose a prior misdemeanor conviction during voir dire.
2. Whether the Sixth Amendment required a twelve-person jury for Drinkard's Florida criminal trial.

Disposition

affirmed