FRANKLIN LEWIS
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Franklin Lewis was convicted of battery after a bench trial without any written or oral waiver of his right to a jury trial. The appellate court, on the State's confession of error, reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding that a defendant's fundamental right to a jury trial cannot be waived without an affirmative record showing.
A defendant's conviction must be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial when the trial court conducts a bench trial without any written or oral waiver appearing on the record showing that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his fundamental right to a jury trial.
[1] A defendant has a fundamental right to a jury trial.
[2] A defendant may waive the right to a jury trial, provided that the waiver appears on the record.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A defendant has a fundamental right to a jury trial.”
Establishes the constitutional foundation for the right at issue
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFranklin Lewis was charged with battery. On June 8, 2010, the trial court conducted a bench trial, found Lewis guilty of battery, withheld adjudicatio…
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.
l. __._.__.___._ ._<q¢---1. ‘ . I l l . x-.1 ,
u»-g
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES
TO FILE RE-HEARING MOTION, _ AND, IF FILED, DISPQSED OF. ~ . ' IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TI-[B
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN
AND FOR MIAMI-DADB COUNTY,
FLORIDA
APPELLATE DIVISION
60=Ius ea/mm; ‘Ti fir\—-,1.4_ -‘=1: Hui G3"-*13 -— CASE NO. I0-278 AC . ,,- _ -W --2 ' LOWER CASEN0. 13090692 .. A3 FRANKLIN.L1-ssns, I _ ‘ -\- ' Appellant, _ _ . ml _ ' V?’ - -' . will ' STATE OFCFLORIDCA, M/.97 ‘°f&A}1/ A . lzkppelleel. . . _ k 9¢z\€M2/9x1: 0 inionfi1w: 2011. {T ' P An Appeal from _the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Flofida, Edward Newman, Judge. ' - ' ' Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Melissa C. Del Valle, Assistant Public Defender, ofthe Office ofthe Public Defender, for Appellant. _ Katherine Fernandez Rundle, State Attorney, and‘ Ryan "Sweeney, Assistant State Attorney, oftho Office ofthe State Aflomey, for Appellee.' Before KARLAN, ECHARTE, m., and BIG, :1. . i _.._-.-I-_L,_,.,.'.,.I__,;,.,_L_i-Q-I-_.i_._.._. [*2] Il .__._,_.%..._:. i i -.--_-.-_. l r i Il"_ .1111
CONFESSION OF ERROR
PER CURIAM.
- Appellant Franklin Lewis was charged with battery. On June 8, 2010, the trial court conducted a bench trial. Thetrial court found Appellant guilty of battery, withheld adjudication, ordered Appellant to perform community service hours, and complete an anger management course. In this case,there was no written or oral waiver ofthe Appellant's right to ajury trial. Based upon the State’s proper confession of error, we hold that the trial court erred in conducting a bench trial in the absence ofany written or oral waiver by Appellant of hisright to ajury trial. _ ' - A A defendant has a fundamental right to ajury trial. U.S. Coast. amend. VI; see also Art. I, §V 22, Fla. Conat. (“the right of trial by jury shall be secure to all and remain , . _r. ._ inviolate.”).- . Moreover, a defendant may waive the right to a jury trial, provided that the waiver appears on the record. Stare v. Upton, ass So. 2a so, s1 (Fla. 1995) (citing Tucker v. State, 559 So. 2d 218-(Fla. 1999)). As the State concedes, the record does notcontain any legally sufficient affirmative showing, eitherwritten or oral, that Appellant waived his right to ejury trial knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. As such, we must reverse the conviction and remand the ease for a newinn. See Smith v. sen, 9 So. an 102, 104 (Fla. zanon zoos) (reversing defendant's conviction and remanding the case becausethe record didnot contain a written or oral waiver by the defendant); Sansoin v. State, 642 So. 2d 631 (Fla. lst DCA 1994) (stating that a new trial is necessitated by the absence ofa valid waiver). Accordingly, this matter is REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.
COPIES FURNISHEDETO COUNSEL
'
OF RECORD AND TO ANY PARTY
NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL
él -s _l_._._.’_..l._.i-.1
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tucker v. State, 559 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 1990)
- Sansom v. State, 642 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)