Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-4064 U.S. v. Gochis

By: dmc-admin//July 16, 2001//

00-4064 U.S. v. Gochis

By: dmc-admin//July 16, 2001//

Listen to this article

“In this case, there is no indication that Gochis has suffered any prejudice as a result of the magistrate judge’s failure to admonish him about his right to a trial before a district judge. His primary concern was to have a jury trial, and he pointedly did not sign the portion of the consent form containing the jury waiver. Gochis has not alleged that he was actually ignorant of his right to a trial before a district judge… And the district court did not find that Gochis’ consent was not knowing and intelligent. In fact, Gochis has not alleged that if he was admonished by the magistrate judge, he would have had his case reassigned to a district judge… Moreover, Gochis and his attorney signed and filed a consent form that explicitly advised him of his right to trial, judgment, and sentencing before a district judge. Additionally, the government’s affidavit indicates that Gochis’ first attorney had informed him of his right to be tried and sentenced by a district judge before he signed the consent form, and that Gochis intended to waive that right. Even though the trial occurred almost a year after Gochis filed his consent form, he never sought to withdraw his consent… Because Gochis has not even alleged that the magistrate judge’s omission affected his decision to waive his right to trial and sentencing before a district judge, the magistrate judge’s technical error was harmless and will be disregarded. Thus, Gochis’ consent to being tried and sentenced by the magistrate judge was valid.”

Reversed and remanded.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Gettleman, J., Manion, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests