Sixth Amendment

The Supreme Court will decide if states can use six-person juries in criminal cases instead of 12, with Florida chiropractor Hamed Kian arguing it violates the Sixth Amendment. Florida and five other states use six-person juries for non-death penalty cases, and the Court previously allowed this in 1970.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear three new cases, including one challenging the constitutionality of Florida’s six-person juries and another involving detention hearings for noncitizens in immigration custody. The cases include Genalo v. Black, which questions when noncitizen detention becomes unreasonably prolonged, and Hamed Kian’s appeal of a conviction by a six-person jury. The court also addressed post-conviction relief standards.

The Supreme Court will determine if states can use six-person juries in criminal cases instead of 12, focusing on the case of Hamed Kian, a Florida chiropractor convicted by a six-person jury. The decision could affect Florida and five other states that use smaller juries for non-death penalty cases. Kian's lawyers argue this violates the Sixth Amendment, while Florida's attorney general defends the 1970 ruling allowing six-person juries.

The Supreme Court will determine if states can use six-person juries in criminal cases, focusing on the case of Hamed Kian, a Florida chiropractor convicted by a six-member jury. Kian's lawyers argue this violates the Sixth Amendment's jury trial guarantee, while Florida's attorney general defends the 1970 ruling allowing smaller juries.

The Supreme Court will consider whether green card holders in prolonged immigration detention are entitled to release hearings under due process. The cases involve two individuals detained for 21 and seven months under a law allowing detention of noncitizens with criminal backgrounds, with the government seeking to resolve a constitutional question left open by a 2018 ruling.