Background
The defendant, Rolex Bryan Bruno, was charged with carjacking and brandishing a firearm. During deliberations, the jury reported being hung on the carjacking count. The district court, over objections, delivered an Allen charge that deviated from the Eleventh Circuit’s pattern instructions by failing to tell jurors they need not give up their honest beliefs. The jury subsequently returned a split verdict, convicting Bruno of carjacking but acquitting him of the firearms count.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the challenge for plain error because the defendant did not object to the content of the Allen charge after it was given. The court found that the district court’s failure to inform jurors that they need not give up their honest beliefs was plain error under controlling precedent. The court determined this error affected Bruno’s substantial rights because the jury returned a split verdict after receiving the improper charge, suggesting the charge may have coerced the jury.
We find that this was plain error.
The dissent
What it means going forward
The decision requires district courts in the Eleventh Circuit to include the honest belief instruction in any Allen charge given to a deadlocked jury to avoid plain error findings.