Supreme Court Considers Six-Person Juries in Criminal Cases

The Supreme Court is set to decide if states can utilize juries of just six people in criminal trials, challenging the traditional 12-member jury. This decision arises from a pivotal case involving Hamed Kian, a Florida chiropractor convicted of practicing with a suspended license.

Florida employs six-person juries for criminal cases excluding those involving the death penalty. Similar practices are found in Arizona, Connecticut, Indiana, Massachusetts, and Utah, where some criminal trials use juries composed of six members.

Kian, aged 45, faced license suspension after allegations of inappropriate conduct were made by three former patients. Despite the suspension, evidence indicated that he continued his practice in Jupiter, leading to his conviction by a six-member jury.

Kian’s legal defense argues that the smaller jury violates the Sixth Amendment, guaranteeing “a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state.” The amendment does not specify jury size, but Kian’s lawyers insist the term “jury” historically implied 12 people, based on the amendment’s adoption in 1791.

Originally, the Supreme Court mandated 12-member juries over 100 years ago. However, in 1970, the court decided, with a 7-1 vote in another Florida case, that the number 12 was not essential. Justice Thurgood Marshall was the lone dissenter in that ruling.

Recently, the court has reemphasized the Constitution’s original intent. In 2020, it ruled that juries must be unanimous in criminal cases, overturning a 1972 decision that permitted non-unanimous verdicts in Louisiana and Oregon. Kian’s lawyers argue that this unanimous requirement supports the historical right to a 12-member jury.

Conversely, Florida’s Attorney General, James Uthmeier, contends that the 1970 ruling should be upheld. He warns that reversing it could jeopardize numerous criminal convictions across Florida and other states, reliant on the established rule for over five decades.