valid jury waiver in California

2022(Sivongxxay, supra, 3 Cal.5th at p. 166 .) If all that is required for a valid jury waiver is representation by counsel, who states generally that they have “gone over [their] client’s rights,” and a barebones presentation of the choice between a “judge trial” and a trial by “12 people from the community,” our Supreme Court’s advisements in Sivongxxay mean very little.

2018While the Supreme Court in Sivongxxay made clear there is no precise formulation for a valid jury waiver advisement, the Court recommended that the trial court advise the defendant that in a trial by jury, the jury is comprised of 12 members of the community, the defendant through his or her attorney may participate in jury selection, 12 jurors must unanimously agree to render a verdict, and in a court trial, the judge alone will decide the defendant's guilt or innocence. ( Sivongxxay , supra , 3 Cal.5th at p. 169, 219 Cal.Rptr.3d 265 , 396 P.3d 424 .) Of this list, the trial court here only a

2023Failure to obtain a valid jury waiver in an OMD case is reversible per se, regardless of the strength of the evidence at trial. ( Blackburn, supra, 61 Cal.4th at pp. 1132-1134.) Accordingly, we reverse.

2018(Id. at pp. 1133–1136.) “Such errors are ‘ “analogous to” ’ those identified in the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. Fulminante (1991) 499 U.S. 279, 290 [citation], including depriving a defendant of counsel, using defendant’s coerced confession in a criminal trial, or trying a defendant before a biased judge [citation].” (People v. Shiga (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 22 , 45–46.) In Blackburn, the error was a failure to obtain a valid jury waiver from a mentally disordered offender before a trial to extend his involuntary civil commitment. ( Blackburn, supra, 61 Cal.4th at pp. 1116

2017For example, if a court should undertake to deny a defendant charged with a felony the right of trial by jury, and after a hearing of the evidence render a judgment of conviction, it cannot be doubted that such judgment should be set aside even though there had been the clearest proof of guilt.' " ( Id . at p. 1139, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 458 , 354 P.3d 268 , quoting People v. O'Bryan (1913) 165 Cal. 55 , 65-66, 130 P. 1042 .) We recently examined the effect of the failure to obtain a valid jury waiver in the context of a trial to extend the civil commitment *327 of a mentally disordered offender (MD

2017For example, if a court should undertake to deny a defendant charged with a felony the right of trial by jury, and after a hearing of the evidence render a judgment of conviction, it cannot be doubted that such judgment should be set aside even though there had been the clearest proof of guilt.' " ( Id . at p. 1139, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 458 , 354 P.3d 268 , quoting People v. O'Bryan (1913) 165 Cal. 55 , 65-66, 130 P. 1042 .) We recently examined the effect of the failure to obtain a valid jury waiver in the context of a trial to extend the civil commitment *327 of a mentally disordered offender (MD

2018(Id. at pp. 1133–1136.) “Such errors are ‘ “analogous to” ’ those identified in the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. Fulminante (1991) 499 U.S. 279, 290 [citation], including depriving a defendant of counsel, using defendant’s coerced confession in a criminal trial, or trying a defendant before a biased judge [citation].” (People v. Shiga (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 22 , 45–46.) In Blackburn, the error was a failure to obtain a valid jury waiver from a mentally disordered offender before a trial to extend his involuntary civil commitment. ( Blackburn, supra, 61 Cal.4th at pp. 1116

2017(See Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668 , 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 ; cf. In re Alvernaz (1992) 2 Cal.4th 924 , 937, 8 Cal.Rptr.2d 713 , 830 P.2d 747 [requiring prejudice for an ineffective assistance claim arising from misadvisement relating to a plea bargain]; Taylor v. Horn , supra , 504 F.3d at p. 450 [requiring prejudice for an ineffective assistance claim arising from a failure to waive jury at a penalty trial].) 3 In contrast, here the trial court failed entirely "to obtain a valid jury waiver." ( Blackburn , supra , 61 Cal.4th at p. 1134, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 458 , 354

2017The MDO and NGI commitment statutes, like section 190.4, subdivision (a), provide that "[t]he trial shall be by jury unless waived by both the person and the [People]." (§§ 1026.5, subd. (b)(4), 2972, subd. (a), italics added.) In neither case, however, had the trial court advised the committee of his right to a jury trial or elicited a personal jury waiver from the committee. ( Blackburn , at pp. 1123-1125, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 458 , 354 P.3d 268 ; Tran , at pp. 1166-1168, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 251 , 354 P.3d 148 .) We held that the failure to obtain the statutorily required jury trial waiver qualified

2017The MDO and NGI commitment statutes, like section 190.4, subdivision (a), provide that "[t]he trial shall be by jury unless waived by both the person and the [People]." (§§ 1026.5, subd. (b)(4), 2972, subd. (a), italics added.) In neither case, however, had the trial court advised the committee of his right to a jury trial or elicited a personal jury waiver from the committee. ( Blackburn , at pp. 1123-1125, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 458 , 354 P.3d 268 ; Tran , at pp. 1166-1168, 191 Cal.Rptr.3d 251 , 354 P.3d 148 .) We held that the failure to obtain the statutorily required jury trial waiver qualified

1971(People v. Pechar, 130 Cal.App.2d 616, 617 [ 279 P.2d 570 ]; People v. Washington, 95 Cal.App.2d 454, 455 [ 213 P.2d 70 ].) Relying on People v. Washington, supra, defendant asserts that the conviction should be reversed because of conflict in the clerk’s and reporter’s transcripts as to the existence of a valid jury waiver.

1971(People v. Pechar, 130 Cal.App.2d 616, 617 [ 279 P.2d 570 ]; People v. Washington, 95 Cal.App.2d 454, 455 [ 213 P.2d 70 ].) Relying on People v. Washington, supra, defendant asserts that the conviction should be reversed because of conflict in the clerk’s and reporter’s transcripts as to the existence of a valid jury waiver.

1971(People v. Pechar, 130 Cal.App.2d 616, 617 [ 279 P.2d 570 ]; People v. Washington, 95 Cal.App.2d 454, 455 [ 213 P.2d 70 ].) Relying on People v. Washington, supra, defendant asserts that the conviction should be reversed because of conflict in the clerk’s and reporter’s transcripts as to the existence of a valid jury waiver.

1971(People v. Pechar, 130 Cal.App.2d 616, 617 [ 279 P.2d 570 ]; People v. Washington, 95 Cal.App.2d 454, 455 [ 213 P.2d 70 ].) Relying on People v. Washington, supra, defendant asserts that the conviction should be reversed because of conflict in the clerk’s and reporter’s transcripts as to the existence of a valid jury waiver.