Enriquez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Enriquez v. State

561 So. 2d 1189, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7142, 1989 WL 153713

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 19, 1989

DocketNo. 87-1929

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 561 So. 2d 1189 (Enriquez v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Enriquez v. State, 561 So. 2d 1189, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7142, 1989 WL 153713 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant Jose Ramon Enriquez from final judgments of conviction and sentences for first-degree murder, armed robbery, and armed burglary entered upon an adverse jury verdict rendered by a six-person jury. We have previously reversed an order granting the defendant a new trial in this case. State v. Enriquez, 503 So.2d 383 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Because the defendant was tried below by a six-person jury and did not personally waive his right to be tried by a twelve-person jury, we reverse the defendant’s first-degree murder conviction and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to conduct a new trial on this charge alone; the fact that the state did not seek the death penalty in this case cannot change this result. Poole v. State, 550 So.2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Joseph v. State, 550 So.2d 1134 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Mustelier v. State, 550 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Rodriguez-Acosta v. State, 548 So.2d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Griffith v. State, 548 So.2d 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Jones v. State, 548 So.2d 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We affirm, however, the armed robbery and armed burglary convictions because the defendant raises no point on appeal concerning these convictions.

At the request of the state, we certify the following question as one of great public importance so as to allow for further review of this decision by the Florida Supreme Court pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(4), of the Florida Constitution.

Whether a twelve-person jury is required in a first-degree murder case in which the prosecution waives the death penalty.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant Jose Ramon Enriquez from final judgments of conviction and sentences for first-degree murder, armed robbery, and armed burglary entered upon an adverse jury verdict rendered by a six-person jury. We have previously reversed an order granting the defendant a new trial in this case. State v. Enriquez, 503 So.2d 383 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Because the defendant was tried below by a six-person jury and did not personally waive his right to be tried by a twelve-person jury, we reverse the defendant’s first-degree murder conviction and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to conduct a new trial on this charge alone; the fact that the state did not seek the death penalty in this case cannot change this result. Poole v. State, 550 So.2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Joseph v. State, 550 So.2d 1134 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Mustelier v. State, 550 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Rodriguez-Acosta v. State, 548 So.2d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Griffith v. State, 548 So.2d 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Jones v. State, 548 So.2d 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We affirm, however, the armed robbery and armed burglary convictions because the defendant raises no point on appeal concerning these convictions.

At the request of the state, we certify the following question as one of great public importance so as to allow for further review of this decision by the Florida Supreme Court pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(4), of the Florida Constitution.

Whether a twelve-person jury is required in a first-degree murder case in which the prosecution waives the death penalty.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

561 So. 2d 1189, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7142, 1989 WL 153713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/enriquez-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack