State v. Camese
99 So. 3d 636
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Sharoy Camese charged by information with distribution of cocaine on March 14, 2011.
- Defendant waived jury trial on May 25, 2011, through counsel; later withdrew bench-trial request on August 12, 2011.
- State opposed withdrawal based on La. Const. art. I, § 17(A), which sets a 45-day irrevocable jury waiver deadline (except in capital cases).
- District court declared Article I, § 17(A) unconstitutional as applied, on US Constitution grounds, and the state appealed.
- This Court previously held in Bazile that a trial judge may not sua sponte raise constitutional challenges not challenged by the defendant.
- The appellate court reversed the district court and remanded for proceedings consistent with Bazile.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court could raise the constitutionality of Article I, § 17(A) sua sponte | State urged constitutional analysis, but Bazile limits sua sponte challenges. | Camese did not challenge the constitutionality; court sua sponte addressed it. | District court erred; reverse and remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bazile v. State, 85 So.3d 1 (La. 2012) (limits trial judges from sua sponte raising constitutional challenges)
- Greater New Orleans Expressway Com’n v. Olivier, 892 So.2d 570 (La. 2005) (judges may not enforce unconstitutional statutes on their own motion)
- Ring v. State, DOTD, 835 So.2d 423 (La. 2003) (judge's role to avoid declaring statutes unconstitutional unless essential)
- State v. Schoening, 770 So.2d 762 (La. 2000) (unconstitutionality must be specially pleaded and grounds particularized)