People v. Watson

Decision Date07 July 1993
Docket NumberNo. 3-92-0910,3-92-0910
Citation616 N.E.2d 649,186 Ill.Dec. 459,246 Ill.App.3d 548
Parties, 186 Ill.Dec. 459 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lamont WATSON, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Mark D. Fisher, Office of the State Appellate Defender, Ottawa, for Lamont Watson.

John X. Breslin, Deputy Director, Lawrence Michael Kaschak, State's Attys. Appellate Prosecutors, Ottawa, and Clarke Erickson, Kankakee County State's Atty., Kankakee, for the People.

Justice LYTTON delivered the opinion of the court:

Following a bench trial, the defendant, Lamont Watson, was convicted of armed violence, unlawful possession of a controlled substance, and unlawful use of weapons. He was sentenced to six years' imprisonment. The defendant appeals.

The record reveals that the defendant's arraignment was held on September 11, 1990. At that time, he pled not guilty and asserted his right to a jury trial.

A pre-trial hearing was held on March 3, 1992. At that hearing, the defendant was represented by counsel but was not present in person. Defense counsel stated, "What I'd like to do is set [case number] 565 for bench trial and we need to make the note to do the jury waiver of Mr. Watson the date that we set." The trial court then continued the cause for a bench trial, stating, "Somewhere in those minutes parenthetically in nice, capital letters get defendant's jury waiver before starting trial."

The trial was initially scheduled for May 12, 1992, but was rescheduled a number of times. The defendant was present at these reschedulings, at which time references were made to the defendant having a bench trial. A bench trial was eventually held on July 6, 1992. The defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to a six-year term of imprisonment.

On appeal, the defendant first argues that his convictions should be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial because the record fails to establish that he knowingly waived his right to a jury trial. We agree and reverse.

We begin by noting that the defendant failed to raise this issue by objecting either at trial or in a post-trial motion. However, the right to a jury trial is a substantial right and should be considered even where it is not raised prior to appeal. 134 Ill.2d R. 615(a); People v. Hall (1991), 221 Ill.App.3d 864, 164 Ill.Dec. 500, 583 N.E.2d 54.

It is generally understood that a jury waiver must be knowingly and understandingly made. (People v. Smith (1985), 106 Ill.2d 327, 88 Ill.Dec. 42, 478 N.E.2d 357.) A determination cannot rest on any precise formula and necessarily turns on the facts of each particular case. (People v. Frey (1984), 103 Ill.2d 327, 82 Ill.Dec. 661, 469 N.E.2d 195.) A jury waiver may be valid if it is made by defense counsel in the presence of the defendant and the defendant does not object. (People v. Clauson (1989), 182 Ill.App.3d 268, 130 Ill.Dec. 719, 537 N.E.2d 1048.) However, a defendant will not be deemed to acquiesce to a jury waiver his counsel made outside his presence. People v. Hall (1991), 221 Ill.App.3d 864, 164 Ill.Dec. 500, 583 N.E.2d 54; People v. Clauson (1989), 182 Ill.App.3d 268, 130 Ill.Dec. 719, 537 N.E.2d 1048.

The State argues that references to a bench trial which were made in the defendant's presence when the trial was rescheduled constituted a jury waiver. We disagree.

In the instant case, at the ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • People v. Turner
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 12, 2007
    ...the jury waiver between the trial court and defense counsel immediately prior to trial), with People v. Watson, 246 Ill.App.3d 548, 549, 186 Ill.Dec. 459, 616 N.E.2d 649, 650 (1993) (finding invalid waiver when made outside defendant presence even though defendant was present during subsequ......
  • In re RAB
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • September 20, 2001
    ...valid if it is made by defense counsel in the defendant's presence and the defendant does not object. People v. Watson, 246 Ill.App.3d 548, 549, 186 Ill.Dec. 459, 616 N.E.2d 649 (1993). No specific admonition or advice is required before an effective jury waiver may be made. People v. Toole......
  • People v. Stokes, 1-93-4491
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 17, 1996
    ...N.E.2d 560 (1996); People v. Jennings, 268 Ill.App.3d 439, 444, 206 Ill.Dec. 146, 644 N.E.2d 1199 (1994); People v. Watson, 246 Ill.App.3d 548, 186 Ill.Dec. 459, 616 N.E.2d 649 (1993); People v. Steiger, 208 Ill.App.3d 979, 981, 153 Ill.Dec. 702, 567 N.E.2d 660 (1991); People v. Williams, 1......
  • People v. Johnson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 26, 2019
    ...of scheduling and at no point waived the right to a jury trial on defendant's behalf. See, e.g. , People v. Watson , 246 Ill. App. 3d 548, 549, 186 Ill.Dec. 459, 616 N.E.2d 649 (1993) ("Vague references to a bench trial at the rescheduling conferences were not sufficient to constitute a val......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT