Opinion ID: 1219372
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Request to Waive Trial by Jury.

Text: Prior to trial, Riley asked the court for a bench trial; however, the court refused this request because the State would not stipulate to a non-jury trial. In Nevada, a criminal defendant cannot waive his right to a jury trial unless the district court and the prosecutor consent to the waiver. NRS 175.011(1) provides: In a district court, cases required to be tried by jury must be so tried unless the defendant waives a jury trial in writing with the approval of the court and the consent of the state. A defendant who pleads not guilty to the charge of a capital offense must be tried by jury. Riley does not challenge the constitutionality of that portion of NRS 175.011(1), which requires consent from the court and the prosecutor before a criminal defendant can waive the right to a jury trial; rather, Riley argues his convictions and sentences should be reversed because the State's decision not to stipulate to a non-jury trial was based upon an improper consideration, to wit: the prosecutor did not want to afford Riley an opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of mandatory jury trials in capital cases under NRS 175.011(1). [3] We should note at this juncture that the record does not indicate why the prosecutor would not stipulate to a non-jury trial. In any event, we reject Riley's contentions on this issue. A criminal defendant has the constitutional right to a trial by an impartial jury, but he does not have the right to compel a bench trial. Rains v. State, 83 Nev. 58, 60, 422 P.2d 541, 542 (1967). See also Singer v. United States, 380 U.S. 24, 85 S.Ct. 783, 13 L.Ed.2d 630 (1965). The State was within its rights when it refused to stipulate to Riley's request for a nonjury trial. [4]