OAKLEY v. STATE (2026)

A six-person jury found Kemar Kasio Oakley guilty of armed robbery with great bodily harm (Count I), aggravated battery with great bodily harm (Count II), felon in possession of a firearm (Count IV), and carrying a concealed firearm (Count V). The trial court sentenced Mr. Oakley to concurrent mandatory minimum terms of thirty-five years in prison on Counts I and II, fifteen years in prison with a three-year mandatory minimum on Count IV, and five years in prison on Count V.

We have jurisdiction. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). He presents two issues.

First, Mr. Oakley contends that the trial court erred in allowing three State witnesses to identify him on surveillance footage because the witnesses were in no better position than the jurors to do so, and their testimony invaded the province of the jury. We are unpersuaded. Second, he asserts that his conviction by a six-person jury violates the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He maintains that this constitutes fundamental error. Under current precedent, Mr. Oakley's conviction by a six-person jury was constitutionally appropriate. See Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 86, 90 S.Ct. 1893, 26 L.Ed.2d 446 (1970); see also Serrano-Delgado v. State, 392 So. 3d 251, 253-54 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024). But see Kian v. Florida, 421 So. 3d 439 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) (table decision); Petition for Writ of Certiorari at ii, Kian v. Florida, No. 25-6623 (U.S. Jan. 9, 2026) (presenting the Court with the question of whether petitioner “was derived [sic] of his right, under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, to a trial by a 12-person jury when the defendant is charged with a serious felony”), cert. granted, ––– U.S. ––––, ––– S.Ct. ––––, ––– L.Ed.2d ––––, 2026 WL 1718018 (U.S. June 15, 2026) (No. 25-6623).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

SILBERMAN, LaROSE, and GUARD, JJ., Concur.