GEORGE PINO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
George Pino was convicted of driving with a suspended license (first-degree misdemeanor) in county court and that conviction was affirmed by a three-judge circuit court. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that Pino was constitutionally entitled to a jury trial, never validly waived that right, and therefore his conviction must be reversed and remanded for a new jury trial.
Yes. A defendant charged with an offense for which he is constitutionally entitled to a jury trial, who files a written demand for jury trial, and who does not personally waive that right (either orally or in writing per Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure) cannot be tried by the court without that personal waiver, and any conviction obtained in violation of this right must be reversed.
[1] A defendant charged with an offense for which a jury trial is constitutionally required is entitled to a jury trial unless the right is knowingly and voluntarily waived.
[2] A conviction obtained in violation of a defendant's right to a jury trial is subject to reversal.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the petitioner George Pino was, without dispute, charged with an offense for which he was constitutionally entitled to a jury trial under the federal and Florida constitutions and, in fact, filed a written demand for a jury trial on this charge in the county court.”
Establishes that Pino clearly had a constitutional right to jury trial and exercised it by written demand
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePino was charged with driving while license suspended as a second offense, a first-degree misdemeanor. He filed a written demand for jury trial in cou…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Waiver Of Jury Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of a three-judge circuit court decision below which affirmed a county court conviction for the first degree misdemeanor of driving while license suspended, as a second offense. § 322.34(1), Fla.Stat. (1983). It is urged that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of the law by affirming this conviction because the defendant was denied his right to trial by jury in the cause.
We agree, and accordingly, grant the petition for a writ of certiorari, quash the decision below, and remand the cause to the circuit court with directions to (a) reverse the conviction for driving while license suspended, and (b) remand the cause to the county court for a new trial by a jury. We reach this result based on the following briefly stated legal analysis.
First, the petitioner George Pino was, without dispute, charged with an offense for which he was constitutionally entitled to a jury trial under the federal and Florida constitutions and, in fact, filed a written demand for a jury trial on this charge in the county court. See Baldwin v. New York, 399 U.S. 66, 90 S.Ct. 1886, 26 L.Ed.2d 437 (1970); Whirley v. State, 450 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 1984); U.S. Const. Amend. 6, 14; Art. I, § 22, Fla. Const.
Second, the petitioner did not himself orally or in writing waive his right to a jury trial on this charge in the county court; he did not execute a written waiver of jury trial, Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.260, or otherwise indicate that he concurred in his counsel’s apparent acquiescence in a non-jury trial below. This being so, the petitioner was denied his right to a jury trial and the conviction which thereafter followed is subject to reversal. See Williams v. State, 440 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), pet. for review denied, 450 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1984); Powers v. State, 370 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 379 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 1979).
Third, the circuit court below departed from the essential requirements of the law in affirm ing the instant conviction under these circumstances and accordingly a writ of certiorari lies to quash this affirmance. The fact that-the petitioner could have filed a post-trial motion to vacate his conviction under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850, see Dumas v. State, 439 So. 2d 246, 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (en banc), does not deprive this court of jurisdiction to review this cause on a petition for a writ of certiorari. Combs v. State, 436 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1983).
Certiorari granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Combs v. State, 436 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1983)
- Baldwin v. New York, 399 U.S. 66 (U.S. 1970)
- Dumas v. State, 439 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Whirley v. State, 450 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 1984)
- Anne Powers v. State, 370 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Williams v. State, 440 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)