Zigan v. State, S06A1415 decided Nov. 30, 2006. The court held that the State has the right to object to a defendant’s request for a bench trial. They reason that he accused has the right to a jury trial, not a bench trial. He is merely waiving his right to a jury trial and that this cannot be done without the State’s consent.
GA Supreme Court grants the State “veto power” to a defendant’s right for a bench trial.
December 7th, 2006 Rob Leonard Posted in Case Law Update No Comments »
Palmaka II
August 6th, 2006 Rob Leonard Posted in Case Law Update, Intox 5000 No Comments »
Palmaka II (Palmaka v. State - A06A1060) was published on July 27, 2006 by the Court of Appeals. It is a bad case for the defense on the issues presented on appeal. We will go into the substance of that later. However, the last paragraph may contain a little gold nugget that defense lawyers need to help with attacks on the Intox 5000 in jury trials. It may make a good jury charge.
“We further note that OCGA 40-6-392(a)(1)(A) provides only for the admissibility of the test results. A defendant remains freee to challenge the weight and credibility of that evidence before the jury.”
Hmmm…that might be helpful. Thanks to Jeremy Citron, the eternal optimist, for pointing that out.