# Prologue — Smith v. New York

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386008_0693%3A0

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Prologue
- **Published:** January 1, 2006
- **Citation:** 548 U.S. 905

## Text

: 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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386008_0693%3A0. Public record. Not legal advice.