The Florida Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in a legal challenge that could trigger a wave of re-sentencings for death row inmates sentenced with less than unanimous jury verdicts.

  • Ruling in James Guzman case could trigger dozens of challenges
  • At least one justice skeptical about significant effect on death row

Because convicted murderer James Guzman was sentenced to death by an 11-to-1 jury vote, he should be given life in prison instead, his attorney told the high court's justices. The sentence was handed down in 2016, before the Florida Legislature passed a law earlier this year requiring unanimity in capital cases.

"All of the instructions other than you have to find a unanimous verdict, everything was qualified under Hurst in this case, and I submit to the court that a life sentence is appropriate here," the attorney, Michael Reiter, said, referring to Hurst v. Florida, a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that prompted the new law.

If the court rules in Guzman's favor, dozens of other inmates sentenced without unanimous jury votes could also become eligible for re-sentencing. At least one justice, however, appeared skeptical that such a scenario would effectively clean out death row.

"We don't know why that one juror voted for life, and clearly was told that would be an appropriate verdict," said Justice Barbara Pariente. "To not vote for death, because there were ten others that were...all they needed was ten."

The Republican-controlled legislature has modified Florida's death penalty sentencing scheme twice in as many years. A 2016 modification allowed for juries to hand down death sentences with supermajority votes of at least 10 out of 12 jurors. That law was found to be in noncompliance with the January 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Hurst v. Florida, prompting lawmakers to pass the unanimity mandate in March.