Court Opinion

ID: 9528779
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:43:53.474269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:20.288678
License: Public Domain

Collins, J.,
dissenting:
I feel the record at the arraignment, coupled with the reasons testified to by appellant at the hearing on the writ of habeas corpus do show a waiver of counsel, “knowingly and intelligently” made. Garnick v. Miller, 81 Nev. 372, 403 P.2d 850 (1965); Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708.
Twice at the arraingment Bundrant was asked by the trial judge if he wanted counsel. Twice he said no in a manner that indicated complete understanding of the importance and nature of the right he was waiving. It is apparent from the record of the hearing on the habeas corpus petition he was “gambling” on his chances for probation and he lost. This is not an unknown practice of persons charged with felony crimes. But it clearly demonstrates to me he suffered no lack of knowledge or intelligence in making his waiver of counsel. Furthermore, he has since been released from prison on parole and cannot be retried.
I would let the conviction stand and deny the appeal.