Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Walker

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided August 12, 2004No. 1 CA-CR 02-0982Published

1DissentKessler, Judge

¶ 31 I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that without an evidentiary hearing, a court can infer that a defendant intentionally and voluntarily waived his right to be present at trial even if there is no evidence the defendant had warning his trial could begin less than 24 hours after his attorney told him no new trial date had been set.

¶ 32 I dissent for several reasons. First, I conclude the trial court erred in two regards. The trial court erred in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine what Walker had been informed about case transfer and what efforts Walker and his…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Crosby v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. State v. SpreitzArizona Supreme Court · 2002
  5. State v. DannArizona Supreme Court · 2003

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API