FSU Jury Project Comprehensive Raw Source Data
In anticipation of the Supreme Court’s oral argument in the case of Kian v. Florida, we assembled a dataset comparing jury decisions in several states that vary in their jury sizes along with several covariates within each state.
The dataset combines court-administration, case-level, conviction, arrest, sentencing, and population data to examine criminal-jury outcomes across jurisdictions that use different jury structures. Florida provides the principal six-person-jury comparison: official Florida court statistics contain jury-trial dispositions by year, circuit, and offense, while jury-management records provide information on trial volume, panel size, juror utilization, and related administrative measures.
Comparison data cover larger-jury jurisdictions including New York, Washington, Kentucky, Texas, the federal courts, and Maryland, although the level of detail differs by source. Some jurisdictions provide jury-specific verdict counts, while others report trial outcomes that combine jury and bench proceedings. The set also includes record-level Florida Department of Corrections data, Florida FDLE conviction and arrest data, Maryland sentencing records, and county-level population data, allowing outcome comparisons to be supplemented with demographic and criminal-justice-process measures.
Together, these sources allow several complementary comparisons. Jury-outcome data can be used to compare prosecution success, acquittals, dismissals, and other trial outcomes in Florida with outcomes observed in jurisdictions operating predominantly under twelve-person-jury systems, while offense and geographic detail can be used to test whether apparent differences reflect case mix rather than jury size alone. The demographic data permit comparisons of the racial composition of conviction records and jury-related convictions, as well as normalization by county population and, where available, race-specific arrest exposure within the same county and offense category. Analyses of the data can test whether Florida appears systematically different in trial outcomes, demographic representation, or institutional burden. Because the underlying sources differ in jury specificity, case selection, offense mix, and reporting conventions, these comparisons are primarily descriptive and should not by themselves be interpreted as identifying a causal effect of six rather than twelve jurors.
Cite data as: Adam Feldman. 2026. FSU Jury Project, Version 1 Release 01. URL: https://igc.fsu.edu/research-data/fsu-jury-project-comprehensive-raw-source-data.