Prologue — Smith v. New York

: e Court, US.

Sur ea

No.

OE1352008 24 2008

jn Ohe OFFICE OF Hi ULEHK

Supreme Court of the Gntted States

+

MATTHEW SMITH,

Petitioner,

We

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

Respondent.

+

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS

4

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

WITH APPENDIX

+

Paul J. Cambria, Jr.

Counsel of Record

LIPsItZ, GREEN, FAHRINGER,

ROLL SALISBURY & CAMBRIA LLP

42 Delaware Avenue

Suite 300

Buffalo, New York 14202

(716) 849-1333

Roger W. Wilcox, Jr. ~f Counsel

Counsel for Petitioner

THE LEX GROUP®°* ¢ 1750 K Street N.W. @ Suite 475 ¢ Washington, DC 20006

(202) 955-0001 @ (800) 815-3791 @ Fax: (202) 955-0022 @www.thelexgroupde.com

QUESTION PRESENTED

Were petitioner’s rights under the Sixth and

Fourteenth Amendments of the United States

Constitution violated by the New York Court of

Appeals’ finding of a knowing and intelligent

waiver of a jury trial from a silent record wherein

the trial court never addressed petitioner

regarding his understanding of the waiver and,

indeed, petitioner never even spoke?

ii

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING

Matthew Smith,

Petitioner.

The People of the State of New York,

Respondents.

li

PARENT AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES

Petitioner is an individual. Parent and subsidiary

companies are not involved in this case.

iV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

CORTERST ICONS PIRES TIDY ooo scone ecsesadesecesccsscccsscsoscse

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING. .o-oocccc--cscccsccccccocccseceee ii

PARENT AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES ..-essccccoseee. iii

TAMA ORCONTENTS (oo ee on iy

TABLE OF AUTHORTIIGS....... vi

OPINIONS AND ORDERS BELOW .o.-ccccccccecccssecccessececee 1

JURISDICTION OF THIS COURT (.cccsoccccss- secs oecseccs, 1

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY

PROVISIONS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE ...-cccsccescosscece 2

STATIOENT OF THECASE.. 4.

A WRIT OF CERTIORARI SHOULD BE

GRANTED ON THE QUESTION OF

WHETHER PETITIONER’S WAIVER OF HIS

RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL SATISFIED

MINIMUM FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL

PARR ee 9

A. The Decision of the New York

Court of Appeals Conflicts With

Decisions of the Supreme Court

and the High Courts of Other

States Concerning the Propriety of

Waivers of Fundamental Rights. ............ 11

esa sia sacenichndncicsbbsennenatioinensvaceserrnsnasnecineresayincis 19

APPENDIX

vil

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page(s)

CASES

Abeokuto v. State,

eS icdhe: WIPE CEU, ARID siiceciniads tis ceaSvecsdtadcnaans 13

Adams v. United States ex rel. McCann,

SLT Wk 20, Oo SEE EO CT PEE civserdiicncovrcs 11, 12

Barker v. Wingo,

467 US. S14, 92S. Ct. 2162 (8972) on ccscesesisessss 13,18

Boykin v. Alabama,

395 US. 238, 89S. Ct. 1709 (1969) ........05..505. 16, 17

Brady v. United States,

DOF Wick Fie Pe as A PROD CERT UD ivkccisnierrnniens 9

Commonwealth v. O’Donnell,

559 Pa. 320, 337, 740 A.2d 198 (1999) ..... ee. 14

Duncan v. Louisiana,

391 U.S. 145, 88 S. Ct. 1444 (1968) 0.0. 11

lowa v. Tovar, ;

941 US. 77, 92, 1245. Ct. 1379 (2004) .........c0c00. 9

Johnson v. Zerbst,

204 US. 458, SBS. Ct. 1049-1938). o..6.:0s ccc 13

Martinez v. State,

309 Mia. 124, 522 A.20 950 (1967) o....cccciccecciecce. 17

Vii

Parke v. Raley,

BOG GS. BA, TASS CR SE CEI) inc cncnsssveccinsnnsies 17

Patton v. United States, |

Mbt US. 276, FOS. CA. Fo ISI) sciseiseccrearsincss 11

Singer v. United States,

300 US. 24, 8S $C. 783 29GB} ini 11

State v. Anderson,

249 Wis.2d 586, 638 N.W.2d 301 (2002) 13,15, 16

State v. Ross,

472 N.W.2d 651 (Minn., 19971)\......ccsceccnsscsssesasenes 14

United States v. Ruiz,

536 US. 622,122 S. Ct CEO TN inviccdiscacs 9

Williams v. Florida,

399 LS. Fay FO oe A RS Fae sean skancien 11

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

1S. COONST. Amen YY id ce cccinas oo hae ee 2

CS. CCT. PI VE soils eee passim

LJ.Se. SOE. PARRTNE FOES einstein eceonenese 3, 4, 12

STATUTE

TE hE ls LEE iuiactnenset dca aa 1

RULES

i Tay gg | |<. ; SMe mene warn on mane aera ulna Mesa TO GME LS aes 1

Vil

I TE NE Desh escasévacassssnsdsoccassenedsesvonbessssese

I cine slicisskvispnavicksinssevronisiasoseinsaess

New York Penal Law 130.35(2) ..0.....ceeeeeeee

New York Penal Law 140.25(2)............ccceee

New York Criminal Procedure Law 330.30

New York Criminal Procedure Law 330.40

New York Criminal Procedure Law 460.20

4

teen eee e ence neenenne

OPINIONS AND ORDERS BELOW

The memorandum opinion of the New York State

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial

Department, affirming petitioner's conviction is

published at 16 A.D.3d 1033, 790 N.Y.S.2d 805. The

decision of the Court of Appeals of the State of New

York affirming the judgment of the Appellate Division

has not yet been published in the official reporter, but

it is available at 2006 WL 796983 (2006 N.Y. Slip Op.

02408).

JURISDICTION OF THIS COURT

The order of the New York State Supreme Court,

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department,

affirming the judgment of petitioner’s conviction of

rape in the first degree and burglary in the second

degree after a bench trial was entered March 18, 2005.

The New York State Court of Appeals entered an order

on March 30, 2006, affirming the decision of the

Appellate Division.

The jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court is

invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1257 and Rules 10 (b),

10(c), and 13 of the Rules of this Court.

to

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY

PROVISIONS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE

United States Constitution, Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital,

or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a

presentment or indictment of a grand jury,

except in cases arising in the land or naval

forces, or in the militia, when in actual service

in time of war or public danger; nor shall any

person be subject for the same offense to be

twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall

be compelled in any criminal case to be a

witness against himself, nor be deprived of

life, liberty, or property, without due process

of law; nor shall private property be taken for

public use, without just compensation.

United States Constitution, Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall

enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by

an impartial jury of the state and district

wherein the crime shall have been committed,

which district shall have been previously

ascertained by law, and to be informed of the

nature and cause of the accusation; to be

confronted with the witnesses against him; to

have compulsory process for obtaining

witnesses in his favor, and to have the

assistance of counsel for his defense.

United States Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United

States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,

are citizens of the United States and of the

state wherein they reside. No state shall make

or enforce any law which shall abridge the

privileges or immunities of citizens of the

United States; nor shall any state deprive any

person of life, liberty, or property, without due

process of law; nor deny to any person within

its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.