Title: State v. Crowley
Citation: 111 Ariz. 308, 528 P.2d 834
Docket Number: 2858
State: Arizona
Issuer: Arizona Supreme Court
Date: December 4, 1974

111 Ariz. 308 (1974) 528 P.2d 834 The STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Samuel Lee CROWLEY, Appellant. No. 2858. Supreme Court of Arizona, In Banc. December 4, 1974. *309 Gary K. Nelson, Former Atty. Gen., N. Warner Lee, Atty. Gen., by Thomas A. Jacobs, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for appellee. Ross P. Lee, Maricopa County Public Defender by Anne Kappes, Deputy Public Defender, Phoenix, for appellant. CAMERON, Vice Chief Justice. As a result of an agreement in which charges of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon were dismissed, defendant, Samuel Lee Crowley, waived his right to a jury trial and submitted the matter to the court based upon the preliminary hearing transcript. Defendant was convicted by the court of first degree rape, § 13-611 A.R.S., and sentenced to eighteen to twenty years in prison. From this judgment he appeals. The issues in the case are as follows: During the early morning hours in December of 1971, a man broke into the house of a young lady in Phoenix, Arizona. He held a knife to the throat of the victim and raped her. He wore an "afro" wig and mask. The victim was able to get a good look at the defendant when the mask was removed and was able to identify him later. Defendant was arrested on 31 March 1972 and charged with rape, burglary and assault with a deadly weapon. After much delay including numerous continuances, an agreement was reached with the prosecutor and the charges of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon were dropped and the matter submitted on the reporter's transcript of the preliminary hearing. From a judgment and conviction of guilt and sentence the defendant appeals. On 7 May 1973, the defendant signed and acknowledged the following document: "WAIVER OF RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY AND AGREEMENT TO SUBMIT CASE ON TRANSCRIPT The record before the court indicates no transcript of a hearing on the motion. We have only the following minute entries: After further continuances the defendant was sentenced on 16 July 1973. The other charges were dismissed as well as an allegation of prior conviction. In a sense the defendant, by submitting the matter on the preliminary hearing transcript, gives up all those rights he waives by a plea of guilty, including the right to trial by jury, right to confrontation, and right to testify in his own behalf. Additionally, when the preliminary hearing transcript shows that the evidence is more than sufficient to support a finding of guilty, such an agreement has the same effect as a plea of guilty. Further, in this case the agreement to submit the matter on the preliminary hearing transcript was also accompanied by an agreement to dismiss other outstanding charges. The present situation is similar to that described by the California Supreme Court when that court stated: Due process requires that the trial court make a record similar to that required by Boykin v. Alabama, supra, to determine if the decision to submit the case on the preliminary hearing transcript was freely, intelligently, and voluntarily made. The trial court must determine, and the record must reflect, that the defendant understood the significance and consequences of submitting the case on the basis of the preliminary hearing transcript. It must affirmatively appear in the record that the defendant knew that he was giving up the right to trial by jury, to testify in his own behalf, to call any witnesses, or to offer any further evidence. The record must reflect that the defendant understood that the whole issue of his guilt or innocence of the offense charged was to be made upon the preliminary hearing transcript. In the instant case the record merely reflects that the defendant "fully discussed all legal questions and constitutional rights with his attorney, * * *." Such a recital does not satisfy the need for a record. State v. Darling, 109 Ariz. 148, 506 P.2d 1042 (1973). This case must be returned to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether the defendant knew the rights that he was waiving by allowing the matter to be submitted on the preliminary hearing transcript. COMPETENCY The presentence report contained the following: Other than this reference in the presentence report there is nothing in the record to question defendant's competency to stand trial or be sentenced. Immediately prior to sentencing on 16 July 1973 defense counsel moved to have Mr. Crowley committed for observation to the Arizona State Hospital. The motion was oral and made as follows: We do not believe herein that the question of defendant's competency to be sentenced has been "substantially raised" or to "be in issue" so as to require the court to conduct a hearing prior to sentencing. State v. Decello, 111 Ariz. 46, 523 P.2d 74 (1974); State v. Romo, 111 Ariz. 70, 523 P.2d 501 (1974). At the most the motion raised a question as to defendant's treatment and rehabilitation but not as to his competency to stand trial or be sentenced, and neither Westbrook v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 150, 86 S. Ct. 1320, 16 L. Ed. 2d 429 (1966) nor Sieling v. Eyman, 478 F.2d 211 (9th Cir.1973) required the trial court in this case to conduct such a hearing before sentencing. This cause is remanded to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether the decision by the defendant to submit the cause on the preliminary hearing transcript was freely, intelligently, and voluntarily made. The trial court, after hearing, will make appropriate findings of fact, and if the trial court finds that the defendant was not aware of the rights which he was giving up the court will proceed to try the matter. If the trial court finds that the defendant was aware of the rights that he was waiving in submitting the matter on the preliminary hearing transcript and that the decision was freely and voluntarily made, the trial court will make the appropriate findings and advise this court of such findings. Remanded with instructions. HAYS, C.J., and STRUCKMEYER, LOCKWOOD and HOLOHAN, JJ., concur.