Kelvin Williams v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1703-CR-504
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 31, 2017Background
- October 26, 2016: Williams was arrested after a traffic stop; a baggie fell from his pant leg during booking containing .47 g cocaine and .72 g methamphetamine.
- State charged Williams with possession of cocaine and methamphetamine; jury convicted him of both as Level 6 felonies at trial.
- During the enhancement phase (to account for a prior conviction and elevate offenses to Level 5), defense counsel stipulated to the prior conviction and the court proceeded to a bench enhancement hearing.
- The court asked Williams brief, perfunctory questions; Williams did not personally and clearly waive his right to a jury for the enhancement phase on the record.
- Trial court found the prior conviction proved, enhanced the convictions to Level 5, and sentenced Williams to an aggregate four-year term (three years DOC, one year community corrections).
- Williams appealed, asserting he did not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waive his right to a jury for the enhancement phase.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Williams validly waived his right to jury for the enhancement phase | State argued waiver can be inferred from circumstances (counsel’s stipulation, Williams’ prior exposure to trials, etc.) | Williams argued there was no personal, knowing, voluntary, and intelligent on-the-record waiver of his Indiana constitutional jury right for enhancements | Reversed: Indiana requires a personal waiver by the defendant for felony jury rights; failure to obtain an on-the-record personal waiver was fundamental error; remand for new enhancement trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Good v. State, 366 N.E.2d 1169 (Ind. 1977) (defense attorney cannot waive a defendant's jury trial right)
- Kellems v. State, 849 N.E.2d 1110 (Ind. 2006) (attorney statements about waiver must be confirmed with the defendant)
- Horton v. State, 51 N.E.3d 1154 (Ind. 2016) (personal waiver requirement applies to enhancement-phase waiver; cannot infer waiver from circumstances)
- Patton v. United States, 281 U.S. 276 (1930) (Sixth Amendment waiver must be express and intelligent)
- Perkins v. State, 541 N.E.2d 927 (Ind. 1989) (Indiana constitutional jury waiver must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent)