Court Opinion

ID: 9520289
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:35:19.731102+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:58.078587
License: Public Domain

Mr. JUSTICE SMITH, dissenting: I cannot agree that Rivera is dispositive of the jury-waiver issue. The facts and circumstances in that case are exactly the converse of what we have in this case. In the opinion itself there is nothing from which it can be fairly concluded that the trial court abused its discretion. It is clear that the court had continued the jury setting one week for the specific purpose of affording the defendants more time. They had it; they didn’t use it; and the bald statement of trial counsel without more as shown in this opinion that he “had no opportunity to contact any of the State’s witnesses” is a frail peg upon which to hand an abuse of discretion. This is particularly true where no sound reason is shown to justify a continuance. There is even no showing that interviewing the State’s witnesses would have aided the defense or that they were not readily available for such purposes. In all other respects, I would concur.