Could Supreme Court gay wedding cake decision help Corrine Brown?

Former congresswoman's attorney claims case law should apply in her appeal

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – Corrine Brown's attorney believes the Supreme Court's decision to side with a baker who refused on religious grounds to make a cake for a same-sex wedding could offer his client a glimmer of hope in her appeal.

Brown, 71, is serving a five-year sentence at a minimum-security Florida prison camp after being convicted of 18 federal counts of fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy.

Recommended Videos



Brown's appeal of that conviction is based entirely on the dismissal of a juror during the guilt phase of her federal trial. That juror had told others on the panel that he had prayed and believed the Holy Spirit had told him Brown was not guilty.

Brown's attorney, William Kent, filed a letter Wednesday pointing out the Supreme Court's recent 7-2 decision, saying it applies to the former congresswoman's appeal because of the way it addressed freedom of religion.

The Supreme Court ruling sided with a Colorado baker who declined in 2012 to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, saying the state Civil Rights Commission that initially ruled against the baker had violated his First Amendment right.

Kent seized on that element of the ruling, saying it also applies to Brown's case, because concerns over whether the jurors were following the law and the court's instructions should have been handled in a way that did not “infringe on the juror's exercise of his right of freedom of religion under the First Amendment.” 

Juror dismissed

The controversy that prompted the juror's dismissal began when juror No. 8 contacted the court during deliberations, saying that she was concerned because juror No. 13 was talking about "higher beings."

According to an unsealed transcript from the closed hearing that Judge Timothy Corrigan called to address the issue, Corrigan asked juror No. 13, a Middleburg Navy veteran, if he said a “higher being” had told him Brown was not guilty on all the charges. The juror responded, “No, I said the Holy Spirit told me that.”

The juror told Corrigan he believed he could follow the court's instructions in coming to a fair judgment, but after interviewing both jurors, Corrigan decided juror No. 13 needed to be dismissed and an alternate was seated, despite objections from Brown's then-attorney, James Smith.

Kent, Brown's current attorney, argues in the appeal that the juror was never told that seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit was a violation of court instructions and that a juror can only be dismissed for willful misconduct, which he says was not established in this case.

He said the court even admitted the juror “likely believed that he was trying to follow the court’s instructions,” which invalidates the court’s decision to remove the juror, Kent argues.

A panel of three appeals court judges will make a ruling on the appeal, but that might not happen for several months.


About the Authors:

A Jacksonville native and proud University of North Florida alum, Francine Frazier has been with News4Jax since 2014 after spending nine years at The Florida Times-Union.