State v. O'Toole
| Decision Date | 17 May 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 21.,21. |
| Citation | 178 A. 780 |
| Parties | STATE v. O'TOOLE. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The constitutional right of the defendant to be arraigned and enter a plea of not guilty is waived by participation by counsel of the accused in the selection of jurors, the presentation of proofs, and summation of the case to the jury.
Error to Supreme Court.
Arthur O'Toole was convicted of an offense, the conviction was affirmed by the Supreme Court, 12 N. J. Misc. 719, 174 A. 505, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
George E. Cutley, of Jersey City, for plaintiff in error.
Daniel T. O'Regan, of Jersey City, for defendant in error.
The defendant was convicted in the Quarter Sessions. The record before us is attenuated. We have decided to consider the case as if it were before us under section 136 of the Criminal Procedure Act (2 Comp. St. 1910. p. 1863, § 136). The judgment record shows no arraignment and no plea, but it does show that there was a jury trial in which an attorney for the defense was present participating in the selection of the jurors, the presentation of evidence, and in the summation to the jury.
The case having proceeded, without objection, as though the defendant had been duly arraigned and a formal plea entered, we fail to see wherein the defendant suffered any manifest wrong or injury. Garland v. State of Washington, 232 U. S. 642, 34 S. Ct. 456, 58 L. Ed. 772; State v. Profita, 114 N. J. Law, 334, 176 A. 683. Undoubtedly, an arraignment and a plea are matters of substance secured to the defendant by the Sixth Amendment to the federal Constitution and by article 1, § 8 of our own Constitution. Johnson v. United States, 225 U. S. 405, 32 S. Ct. 748, 56 L. Ed. 1142. Still there is no reason why these rights may not be waived by conduct such as here.
The arraignment is perhaps best understood as the formal opportunity given the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. When so informed, he can enter his plea, and if a plea of not guilty is entered, a jury is impaneled, when the case is moved. The accused in this case, if he had, through his counsel, made known to the court the fact that he had not been arraigned, could then have been called to the bar and been informed of the charge as made against him. A plea could then have been entered. Since no objection was made by counsel to the circumstance that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Hill
...47 Del. 391, 91 A.2d 537; Bridges v. State, 247 Wis. 350, 19 N.W.2d 529, 862; Maher v. State, 144 Neb. 463, 13 N.W.2d 641; State v. O'Toole, 115 N.J.L. 205, 178 A. 780; Stewart v. State, 164 Tenn. 202, 46 S.W.2d 811; Wescoat v. State, 47 Ohio App. 266, 191 N.E. 816. It was anticipated in a ......
-
State v. Rogers
...the defendant had tendered a plea by conduct. Garland v. State of Washington, 232 U.S. 642, 34 S.Ct. 456, 58 L.Ed. 772; State v. O'Toole, 115 N.J.L. 205, 178 A. 780; State v. Simon, 116 N.J.L. 452, 185 A. 366. We perceive no debatable distinction between this case and those just It is furth......
-
State v. Mangino
...an arrest is a defect curable by waiver. Cf. State v. Giberson, 99 N.J.L. 85, 122 A. 724 (E. & A. 1923); State v. O'Toole, 115 N.J.L. 205, 178 A. 780 (E. & A.1935), certiorari denied 296 U.S. 613, 56 S.Ct. 133, 80 L.Ed. 435 (1935); see State v. Keller, 137 N.J.L. 637, 61 A.2d 283 (Sup.Ct.19......
-
State v. Huber
...in a death sentence. When they urged the court to accept his plea, clearly they meant a plea of Non vult. Compare State v. O'Toole, 115 N.J.L. 205, 178 A. 780 (E. & A.1935). Huber appears to have no valid cause for The order of the County Court is affirmed. ...