Day v. State, 1 Div. 149
| Decision Date | 25 November 1980 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 149 |
| Citation | 395 So.2d 119 |
| Parties | Ricky A. DAY v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Floyd C. Enfinger, Jr. of Lacey, Enfinger & Newell, Fairhope, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen., and Cynthia D. Welch, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Grand larceny; sentence: ten years' imprisonment.
A Baldwin County Grand Jury indicted the appellant for grand larceny of an air-conditioner on July 7, 1977. On December 6, 1978, a hearing was held before Judge Wilson Hayes concerning motions for continuance in several cases involving the appellant at which time appellant's counsel stated:
On December 27, 1979, counsel for appellant filed a motion to reinstate his demand for a jury trial. On February 20, 1980, there was a hearing on this motion before Circuit Judge Harry Wilters. At this hearing Judge Hayes testified concerning the prior waiver of a jury trial:
....
Judge Wilters denied appellant's motion to reinstate a jury demand based on appellant's previous waiver of his right to a jury trial. On April 15, 1980, appellant was arraigned at trial and entered a plea of not guilty. Again, appellant renewed his jury trial demand, but the judge once more denied the motion.
Appellant contends that the trial judge erred in denying his affirmative requests for a trial by jury. Alabama law is clear that a defendant charged with a noncapital felony may waive a jury trial with the consent of the State and the trial court provided the waiver is made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marquez v. State
...and intelligently--implying that the trial court's discretion is absolute once a valid waiver has been made. Day v. State, 395 So.2d 119, 120 (Ala.Crim.App.1980). Wabaunsee v. State, 554 P.2d 36, 38 (Okla.Crim.App.1976). 2 Some states require an affirmative showing by the defendant that he ......
-
Spradley v. State
...necessary nor mandated. Murphy v. State, 347 So.2d 1369 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 347 So.2d 1371 (1977). See also Day v. State, 395 So.2d 119 (Ala.Cr.App.1980), cert. denied, 395 So.2d 120 This issue was not raised in the trial court and is not preserved for review before this court. Thi......
-
Arnold v. State
...the waiver is made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently in light of all the surrounding circumstances." Day v. State, 395 So.2d 119, 120 (Ala. Crim. App. 1980). Moreover, " ‘[i]f the record is silent as to the reasoning behind counsel's actions, the presumption of effectiveness is suff......
-
Maye v. State
...is absolute once made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently, and the waiver cannot thereafter be withdrawn. See Day v. State, 395 So.2d 119, 120 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Wabaunsee v. State, 554 P.2d 36, 38 (Okla.Crim.App.1976). ¶ 55. Our supreme court has pointed out how a trial court's fai......