Barnum v. State
655 So. 2d 1307, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 15578, 1995 WL 348325
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Barnum v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 10466 →
Opinion
Appellant challenges his conviction and sentence following a nonjury trial. As the [1308]*1308record does not contain any evidence of a knowing waiver of the appellant’s constitutional right to a jury trial, we must reverse. The state concedes that a new trial must be granted. See Tucker v. State, 559 So.2d 218 (Fla.1990); Sansom v. State, 641 So.2d 201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Barnum v. State, 655 So. 2d 1307, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 15578, 1995 WL 348325 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).
655 So. 2d 1307 (Barnum v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Tucker v. State
559 So. 2d 218 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
Sansom v. State
641 So. 2d 201 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)