RODNEY PETE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1996-01-23
No. 95-492
JOANOS, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
666 So. 2d 1015 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1996)

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his conviction and sentence following a non-jury trial. The record reflects that the trial court failed to conduct an adequate inquiry in open court prior to accepting appellant’s waiver of jury trial.1 Compare Zeigler v. State, 647 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). As a result, we are unable to conclude that appellant’s waiver of his constitutional right to a jury trial was knowing and intelligent. See Tucker v. State, 559 So. 2d 218 (Fla.1990) (an appropriate oral colloquy should focus defendant’s attention on the value of a jury trial and should make a defendant aware of the likely consequences of the waiver). REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.

JOANOS, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur. . No written waiver of jury trial appears in the record.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw