U.S. v. Delgado, 80-1877
| Citation | 635 F.2d 889 |
| Decision Date | 20 February 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 80-1877,80-1877 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Manuel DELGADO, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit) |
James I. Marcus, Chicago, Ill., for defendant-appellant.
Michael Siegel, Asst. U. S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before BAUER, Circuit Judge, KUNZIG, Judge, * and WOOD, Circuit Judge.
Manuel Delgado was charged with two counts of distributing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He was convicted of both counts in a bench trial. He claims on appeal that the trial court failed to ascertain that he knowingly and intelligently waived a jury trial and that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the conviction on count II. We reverse and remand.
Count II of the indictment charged Delgado with distributing cocaine in a sale that occurred October 15, 1979. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, we find that it was sufficient to support the conviction on this count. Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942).
Henry Ordetx, a co-defendant, told Frank Tucci, the purchasing government undercover agent, that he had five ounces of cocaine to sell, but he would not complete the transaction until Delgado arrived. Tr. at 93. After Delgado arrived, Ordetx, Jesus Torres, a confidential informant, Tucci, and Delgado conducted negotiations for the sale of the cocaine in the back room of Delgado's driving school. Tr. at 48, 73. When Ordetx threatened to cancel the sale after Tucci refused to allow his car to be used to go pick up the cocaine, Delgado saved the transaction by offering to drive Torres to his car so that Torres could bring his car to the driving school for Ordetx to use. Tr. at 50. After Ordetx drove off in Torres' car, Delgado told agent Tucci to get the money and bring it into the driving school. Tr. at 52. Finally, after Ordetx returned to the driving school with the cocaine, Ordetx told Tucci in Delgado's presence that he could deliver five ounces of cocaine per day. Tr. at 95. Delgado's presence at the transaction and his "service as a functionary of the scheme" was sufficient to support his conviction on count II. United States v. DeLeon, 498 F.2d 1327, 1332 (7th Cir. 1974).
In United States v. Scott, 538 F.2d 362 (7th Cir. 1978), we adopted a supervisory rule governing trial court acceptance of a jury trial waiver. Before the district court accepts the waiver, the court must interrogate the defendant "to ensure that (the defendant) understands his right to a jury trial and the consequences of waiver." Id. at 364.
Delgado claims that the trial court failed to comply with the mandate of Scott. Delgado's attorney informed the trial court that Delgado wished to waive trial by jury. Counsel also stated that he had explained the right to a trial by jury to Delgado. The court instructed the interpreter ** to read the waiver form to Delgado. Delgado then signed the waiver. The following colloquy occurred between the court and defendant:
We agree that trial court's inquiry in this case did not satisfy the requirements of the rule announced in United States v. Scott. The trial court could not determine from this colloquy whether Delgado understood his right to a jury trial and understood the consequences of waiver.
The Scott opinion did not specify the questions that should be addressed to the defendant; rather, we advised the district courts to adopt some type of formal jury waiver inquiry. We take this opportunity to advise the trial courts that they should explain that a jury is composed of twelve members of the community, that the defendant may participate in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Sivongxxay, S078895
...many other courts have offered guidance regarding important components of the waiver colloquy. (See, e.g., U.S. v. Delgado (7th Cir. 1981) 635 F.2d 889, 890 [trial courts "should explain that a jury is composed of twelve members of the community, that the defendant may participate in the se......
-
People v. Sivongxxay
...observe that many other courts have offered guidance regarding important components of the waiver colloquy. (See, e.g., U.S. v. Delgado (7th Cir. 1981) 635 F.2d 889, 890 [trial courts "should explain that a jury is composed of twelve members of the community, that the defendant may particip......
-
US ex rel. Williams v. DeRobertis
...define what a defendant must know about the nature of the jury right. Some guidance on this score is provided by United States v. Delgado, 635 F.2d 889, 890 (7th Cir. 1981). In Delgado, the court of appeals, acting pursuant to its supervisory power over the lower federal courts, stated what......
-
Dumas v. State
...applicable rule, like Florida's, does not go nearly that far. United States v. Scott, 583 F.2d 362 (7th Cir.1978); United States v. Delgado, 635 F.2d 889 (7th Cir.1981) (requiring complete interrogation by trial judge in open court although Fed.R.Crim.P. 23(a) provides only for signed writt......
-
Prior convictions of separate offenses
...v. Johnson (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 978), Federal cases require some detail (see U.S. v. Cochran 770 F2d 850 (9th Cir 1985); U.S. v. Delgado 635 F2d 889 (7th Cir 1981); United States v. Welty 647 F2d 185 (3d Cir 1983); Piankhy v. Cuyler 703 F2d 728 (3d Cir 1983); United States v. Wadsworth 830......
-
Table of cases
...v. Crawford , 372 F.3d 1048, 1054 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc), §6:32.7 U.S. v. Dayea, 32 F.3d 1377 (9th Cir. 1994), §3:44.4 U.S. v. Delgado, 635 F2d 889 (7th Cir. 1981), §4:15.1 U.S. v. DeStefano (2nd Cir. 2001) 247 F.3d. 397, §10:27.3 U.S. v. Dichiarinte (7th Cir. 1971) 445 F.2d 126, §7:68 U......