Opinion ID: 1660908
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: whether spry was improperly arraigned?

Text: ¶ 12. Spry contests the fact that he was arraigned by the Circuit Clerk instead of by a judge. Whether this arraignment was proper or not, Spry did not object at the time and raises this issue for the first time on appeal. Without holding this arraignment invalid but assuming it is, this Court has held that arraignment may be waived when the defendant goes to trial. Bufkin v. State, 134 Miss. 1, 98 So. 452 (1923). A defendant may waive arraignment, either expressly or impliedly, by proceeding to trial without objection, and one who has by his assent and conduct thus impliedly joined issue with the state on an affidavit or indictment, cannot, by objection to a later arraignment, avoid a conviction. Id. at 16, 98 So. at 454. This rule is further stated in the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court Practice: In all cases waiver of the reading of the indictment may be permitted if the defendant is represented by an attorney. Arraignment is deemed waived where the defendant proceeds to trial without objection. U.R.C.C.C. 8.01. Spry's attorneys were present when he pled guilty to the charges against him. At this hearing, no objection was made to the form of his earlier arraignment or lack thereof. By pleading guilty without objecting to his arraignment, Spry has waived any objection. This issue is without merit.