Question

Although not true in all states, Florida requires a unanimous decision for a jury's verdict. Juries throughout our country can range anywhere from 6 to 12 members. Would a defendant like Clarence Gideon be better off with 12 members on the jury, or would he be better off to have fewer members? Explain your reasoning.

Answer 1

As Florida requires a unanimous decision for a jury's verdict, having more members on the jury could potentially increase the chances of a hung jury, where the jurors are unable to reach a unanimous decision. In the case of Clarence Gideon, who was famously represented by himself in court, having fewer members on the jury could potentially make it easier to persuade a majority of the jurors to his side. However, this would also mean that there is a greater chance of a biased or unfair outcome, as having fewer jurors may not necessarily provide a representative sample of the community. Ultimately, the decision of how many members to have on a jury would depend on a range of factors, including the severity of the charge, the complexity of the case, and the individual circumstances of the defendant.

Step-by-step explanation: