Whether a conviction can be obtained, in light of Ramos v. Louisiana holding that the Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous jury to convict, when the record does not affirmatively indicate that the jury was unanimous, evidence of a jury count exists, and no polling was conducted

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED , ~* IN RAMOS ¥. LOWISIANA | Tilis Coup HED THAT THE SikTH AMENOMENT To THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION , GX TEN DED To THE STATES BY WAY OP THE Four TeentH AMENDMENT , RERUIKED THAT A UNANiMoVS JURY Must FIND A DEFENDANT evi uty OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE IN LOUISIANA. RAMOS vWVISIANA, S90 US. , 1405.7. 120 Loe L-ED.LD 933 (WW), TAls IncivoeD cases THAT WEE PENDING oN DIRECT ZevieW WHEN FAMOS V. LOVISIANA WAS PECIDED. GRIFF ITM V. KENTUCKY , 4719 U-5. 314, 323, JOT S-CT. 198, NW, ASL. ED-2D 44 (1491), EVIDENCE OF A SURY CONT EXISTS “THONG A OVESTION FICOM he TRIAL SURGE To THE SYUAY CONFIEMING THAT ATLEAST to goes ROPCED To THE VERDICT ANO AN ANSWER Feom THE Jugy FoREPEr SON (ZESPOWwING NES. THE ET of APPEAL, FOURT CIRCUT ACKNOWLEP 6fb THAT THE QUESTION Fr LeANiMiTy FEMAINEP USZESOUIEP WITH NoTHINiy DEFINITIVELY SAYING WHETHER. THE SPRY VOTES WERE (0-2, Ml, OF 12°O BOT HELD THAT THE Urey VEPpicrs WEE I2-O NONE THE LESS. THE QUESTION FEESENTEO By THESE Cie CUMSTANLES IS. ; WHETHEP & CONVICTLON CAN BE ORSTAINED, IN LIGHT OF THIS cogs Yolo (Ne Iw RAMOS V. LOUISIANA THAT THE SIXTH AMENDMENT BEUIZES A VNANI MoS SUEY Te CONVICT, WHEY THE FECOED DOES NOT APRIEMATINELy bNie CATE TOAT THE oy WAS UWABIMOUS, EVIDENCE OF A JURY COUNT EXISTING, ANb No POLine BEING CONDUCTED. i)