Court Opinion

ID: 9795865
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:40:52.211766+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:37:48.167289
License: Public Domain

VOIGT, Chief Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which BURKE, Justice, joins in part.
[¶ 23] I concur with the majority's resolution of the jury panel issue, but I would reverse on the second issue. I believe the facts of this case are barely distinguishable from those in Guinn v. State, 2009 WY 15, 17, 201 P.3d 423, 424 (Wyo.2009), where we reversed a conviction because "the record certainly leaves open the possibility that the district court's sentencing decision was based in part upon" the appellant's exercise of his right to trial by jury. The present facts may be even more egregious. In Guinn, the judge merely said he believed it was appropriate in sentencing to consider that the ap-peliant had not pled guilty. Id. at ¶ 5, 201 P.3d at 424. Here, the judge openly avowed that a jury trial conviction would result in "no request for any type of probation."