State v. Ida Perez Vasquez
43260
| Idaho Ct. App. | Jul 3, 2017Background
- In 2012 police investigated prior (2009) recanted sexual-abuse allegations and obtained evidence that Ida Perez Vasquez coached the child to recant; Vasquez was charged with intimidating a witness.
- Vasquez initially pleaded not guilty; the case was set for trial and mediation failed. The day before trial, counsel for both sides told the court they would waive a jury and proceed to a bench trial.
- At the morning of trial counsel for both parties confirmed on the record the waiver; the court did not personally ask Vasquez whether she personally waived her jury right.
- The court conducted a bench trial, convicted Vasquez of felony intimidating a witness, and sentenced her; Vasquez appealed claiming her personal right to a jury trial was not waived by her personally.
- The Court of Appeals applied Idaho’s fundamental-error (Perry) test, concluded Article I, § 7 of the Idaho Constitution requires a defendant’s personal, express waiver of a jury trial, and found the district court’s failure to obtain that waiver was structural error.
- The Court vacated the conviction and remanded, holding that structural error satisfies Perry’s prejudice prong without a showing of actual outcome prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a jury-trial waiver may be made by counsel without the defendant’s personal assent | State argued waiver could be inferred from counsel’s on-the-record stipulation and prior cases (e.g., Umphenour context) | Vasquez argued Article I, § 7 and precedent require the defendant personally, in open court or in writing, to waive the right | Court held Idaho Constitution and Idaho precedent require a defendant’s personal, express waiver for jury trial waiver |
| Whether failure to obtain a personal waiver is structural error requiring reversal without a showing of prejudice | State implicitly argued any error was not structural and requires prejudice showing under Perry | Vasquez argued the invalid waiver is a structural defect that obviates the need to show prejudice | Court held the error is structural; structural defects satisfy Perry’s prejudice prong so reversal is required without showing actual outcome prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Swan, 108 Idaho 963, 703 P.2d 727 (Ct. App. 1985) (holding defendant must personally waive jury trial in open court or in writing)
- State v. Perry, 150 Idaho 209, 245 P.3d 961 (Idaho 2010) (articulating Idaho three-part fundamental-error test)
- Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (1991) (distinguishing trial errors and structural defects)
- Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968) (recognizing jury trial as fundamental right in serious state crimes)
- Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 (1993) (holding certain constitutional errors are structural and not subject to harmless-error analysis)
- United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (2006) (erroneous deprivation of counsel of choice is structural error)
- Fortune v. United States, 59 A.3d 949 (D.C. 2013) (failure to obtain defendant’s personal jury-waiver required by statute is structural error)
- People v. Ernst, 881 P.2d 298 (Cal. 1994) (state constitutional requirement that waiver be expressed by defendant in open court; failure is structural error)