State v. Harvey, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1248

Harvey was convicted by bench trial of Counts I–IV (robbery in the first degree, armed criminal action, unlawful possession of a firearm, possession of a controlled substance) after waiving a jury trial.
The trial court stated it would run all counts concurrently, and would consider the jury-waiver as a sentencing factor if applicable.
Harvey’s waiver of jury trial was entered after substantial on-record questioning and a written memorandum signed by Harvey and counsel.
The trial court orally sentenced Counts I–III and IV to 30 years total, with concurrent terms; the written judgment later stated 30 years on Count IV.
The written sentence on Count IV did not match the oral pronouncement (15 years vs. 30 years); the State conceded this discrepancy.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was Harvey's jury-trial waiver knowingly and intelligently made?	Harvey argues the court's unsolicited statements tainted the waiver.	Harvey contends the waiver was not voluntary and the record lacked unmistakable clarity.	Waiver valid; no manifest injustice; point denied.
Does the written sentence on Count IV conform to the oral sentence?	State concedes written sentence discrepancy.	N/A.	Modify judgment to 15 years on Count IV, concurrent with Counts I–III; affirmed as modified.

State v. Smallwood, 230 S.W.3d 662 (Mo.App.2007) (plain-error review framework for jury-waiver issues)
State v. Baxter, 204 S.W.3d 650 (Mo.banc 2006) (waiver of jury trial requires knowing, voluntary, and intelligent consent and record clarity)
State v. Bibb, 702 S.W.2d 462 (Mo.banc 1985) (unmistakable-record requirement for jury-waiver)
State ex rel. Zinna v. Steele, 301 S.W.3d 510 (Mo.banc 2010) (oral pronouncement controls when written judgment differs)
State v. McGee, 284 S.W.3d 690 (Mo.App.2009) (procedure for correcting clerical or sentencing-error discrepancies)