State v. Upton

Decision Date20 July 1995
Docket NumberNo. 84732,84732
Citation658 So.2d 86
Parties20 Fla. L. Weekly S387 STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. John Wayne UPTON, Respondent.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen.; James W. Rogers, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee Bureau Chief, Crim. Appeals, and Patrick Martin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Jamie Spivey, Asst. Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, for respondent.

GRIMES, Chief Justice.

We have for review the following question certified to be of great public importance:

Does a lawyer's written waiver of jury trial on behalf of his client validly waive the defendant's right to a jury trial where there is no indication in the record that the defendant agreed to the written waiver or otherwise made a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver of his right to a trial by jury?

Upton v. State, 644 So.2d 181 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, Sec. 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

Upton was tried without a jury pursuant to the following written waiver:

Now in the Court through undersigned counsel comes the defendant, John Wayne Upton and stipulates a waiver of his right of a Jury Trial and elects to try this matter before the Honorable John Kuder.

The waiver was signed by Upton's attorney and the prosecutor. Upton did not sign the waiver and the trial judge did not inquire as to whether Upton understood or concurred in the waiver. The First District Court of Appeal reversed Upton's conviction and sentence because it found that the record did not demonstrate that Upton had made a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of his right to trial by jury.

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that a defendant has a fundamental right to a jury trial. U.S. Const., amend. VI. The Florida Constitution specifies that "the right of trial by jury shall be secure to all and remain inviolate." Art. I, Sec. 22, Fla. Const. An effective waiver of a constitutional right must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 90 S.Ct. 1463, 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970). A defendant may waive the right to a jury trial, provided that the waiver appears on the record. Tucker v. State, 559 So.2d 218 (Fla.1990).

Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.260 provides: "A defendant may in writing waive a jury trial with consent of the state." The most reasonable reading of this rule suggests that the defendant's signature, rather than defense counsel's signature, is required in order for the waiver to be effective. See Williams v. State, 440 So.2d 1290, 1291 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), review denied, 450 So.2d 489 (Fla.1984). When the record contains a written waiver signed by the defendant, the waiver will be upheld. Parker v. State, 636 So.2d 794 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 642 So.2d 747 (Fla.1994); Dumas v. State, 439 So.2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (en banc), review denied, 462 So.2d 1105 (Fla.1985).

While conceding that rule 3.260 "arguably requires" the waiver to be signed by the defendant, the State argues that Upton's failure to sign the waiver constituted mere technical noncompliance with the rule. The State asserts that implicit in the written waiver signed by Upton's attorney is the presumption that Upton was aware of his right to a jury trial, understood the consequences and advantages of waiver, and had authorized his attorney to sign the waiver on his behalf. The State also points out that Upton was present throughout the trial, but never indicated that he was opposed to the trial judge sitting as the fact-finder.

Indeed, this Court has held that rule 3.260 is not the sole method for waiving the right to jury trial. In Tucker, we held that a defendant may orally waive the right to jury trial if the defendant is represented by counsel and receives full explanation of the consequences of the waiver by the trial judge. Tucker, 559 So.2d at 220. However, our...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • State v. Morel-Vargas
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • May 10, 2022
    ...a waiver of the right to a jury trial do not require the same to demonstrate a waiver of the right to testify. Compare State v. Upton , 658 So. 2d 86, 88 (Fla. 1995) (concluding that, because "there was no affirmative showing on the record" that defendant personally waived his right to jury......
  • State v. Gore
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • September 23, 2008
    ...442, 443-44, 353 P.2d 583, 5 Cal.Rptr. 871 (1960); Rice v. People, 193 Colo. 270, 271-72, 272 n. 2, 565 P.2d 940 (1977); State v. Upton, 658 So.2d 86, 88 (Fla.1995); Balbosa v. State, 275 Ga. 574, 575, 571 S.E.2d 368 (2002); Allison v. State, 288 Ga.App. 482, 485-90, 654 S.E.2d 628 (2007); ......
  • Johnson v. State
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • September 18, 2008
    ...for review Johnson v. State, 944 So.2d 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), which expressly and directly conflicts with the decisions in State v. Upton, 658 So.2d 86 (Fla.1995), and Tucker v. State, 559 So.2d 218 (Fla.1990). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Con......
  • Mullens v. State
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • June 16, 2016
    ...L.Ed. 854 (1930), abrogated on other grounds by Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 90 S.Ct. 1893, 26 L.Ed.2d 446 (1970) ; State v. Upton, 658 So.2d 86, 87 (Fla.1995).Other states have reached similar conclusions in the context of capital sentencing. In states where defendants who pleaded gui......
  • 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