Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Haggard

Court of Appeals of Idaho

August 30, 2019

STATE OF IDAHO, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
CLINTON HAGGARD, Defendant-Appellant.

          Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bingham County. Hon. Darren B. Simpson, District Judge. Hon. James H. Barrett, Magistrate.

         Decision of the district court, on intermediate appeal from the magistrate, affirming judgment of conviction for misdemeanor domestic battery, reversed and case remanded.

          Trevor L. Castleton, Bingham County Public Defender, Idaho Falls, for appellant.

          Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; John C. McKinney, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

          LORELLO, JUDGE

         Clinton Haggard appeals from the decision of the district court, on intermediate appeal from the magistrate, affirming Haggard's judgment of conviction for misdemeanor domestic battery, which the magistrate entered following a court trial. Haggard contends that his written waiver of the right to a jury trial was constitutionally defective because the magistrate did not inquire into the validity of the waiver prior to proceeding to a court trial. This argument was raised for the first time on appeal to the district court. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the decision of the district court and remand for further proceedings.

         I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         The State charged Haggard with misdemeanor domestic battery. I.C. § 18-918(3)(b). While in custody at the jail, Haggard initialed and signed a notification of rights form, which included the following language:

[Paragraph] 4. Should you plead "not guilty", you have the right to a trial before the Court or a jury of six (6) jurors drawn from the Court Jury Panel. You may bring witnesses or evidence to the trial on your behalf and you will have the opportunity to confront and cross-examine witnesses testifying against you.

         On the same day, Haggard appeared before the magistrate for arraignment and the magistrate advised Haggard of his rights. Haggard pled not guilty and requested the appointment of a public defender to represent him. Haggard also signed and dated a statement of rights for domestic assault or battery cases, which included the following provisions:

3. You have the right to a jury trial and to compel the attendance of witnesses on your behalf without expense to you.
. . . .
4. NOT GUILTY PLEA. If you plead NOT GUILTY, the court will ask you whether you wish to have a trial before a jury or a trial before a judge only, and will set a trial date.
. . . .
10. I HAVE READ THIS DOCUMENT OR HAD IT EXPLAINED TO ME AND HAVE RECEIVED A COPY.

         At the pretrial conference held approximately one month later, Haggard, his counsel and the prosecuting attorney signed a pretrial stipulation and order, which was filed with the court. The stipulation included an option for a court trial and an option for a jury trial. The option for court trial was checked. That option reads: "COURT TRIAL is set for 7 day of Sept., 2016 at 1:15 P.M. And the right to have this matter heard by jury trial is waived by both parties." Although the stipulation and order also included a signature line for a magistrate, a magistrate did not sign the document.[1] A court trial ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.