United States v. Johnson

2nd CircuitJul 14, 2025

Split Score

SplitScore: 69/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The Second Circuit, sitting en banc on a petition for rehearing, declined to revisit a panel decision that had affirmed Rickey Johnson’s convictions despite the district court’s dismissal of a twelfth juror before deliberations began. The majority of active judges agreed that the Rule 23(b) error was subject to harmless-error review because only constitutional violations may qualify as structural errors, while several judges dissented, arguing that the denial of a twelve-person jury is a structural error regardless of its constitutional status and warrants automatic reversal.

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether an error must implicate a constitutional right to be deemed a 'structural error' that automatically requires reversal, and, by extension, whether a Rule 23(b) violation (proceeding with eleven jurors without consent) can ever be structural.

Circuit Positions

1st Circuit3rd Circuit4th Circuit5th Circuit10th Circuit

Structural errors must involve the deprivation of a constitutional right; non-constitutional defects (including an eleven-person jury) are reviewed for harmless error.

8th Circuit11th Circuit12th Circuit

Certain non-constitutional errors, such as dismissing the twelfth juror contrary to Rule 23(b), are structural and automatically reversible.

Conflict Summary

Most circuits hold that only violations of fundamental constitutional rights can constitute structural errors, making non-constitutional trial defects—such as a Rule 23(b) jury-size violation—subject to harmless-error review. A minority of circuits have held that some non-constitutional defects, including Rule 23(b) violations, are structural and require automatic reversal.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Rickey Johnson
Appellee:United States of America

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Colleen P. Cassidy, Federal Defenders of New York
Appellee:Kyle A. Wirshba, Assistant United States Attorney (with Patrick R. Moroney and Stephen J. Ritchin) for Damian Williams, U.S. Attorney, S.D.N.Y.

Opinion Document