ROMINGER LEGAL
Virginia Legal Research & Resources - VA Legal Resources
Need Legal Help?
NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE
This opinion or court case is from the Courts of Virginia. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH
COURT REPORTERS
PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS
PROCESS SERVERS
DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS
EXPERT WITNESSES

 

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

 
Web Rominger Legal

Legal News - Legal Headlines

 

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA



Present:   Judges Annunziata, Clements and McClanahan
Argued at Richmond, Virginia


RONNIE ADOLPHUS NOEL
  MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY
v. Record No. 3248-02-2 JUDGE JEAN HARRISON CLEMENTS
JUNE 8, 2004
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA


FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HENRICO COUNTY
George F. Tidey, Judge

 Matthew P. Geary (William S. Francis, Jr., on brief), for appellant.

 Amy L. Marshall, Assistant Attorney General (Jerry W. Kilgore,
Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.


Ronnie Adolphus Noel was convicted in a bench trial of four counts of credit card theft, in
violation of Code   18.2-192, two counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code   18.2-195, and
two counts of grand larceny, in violation of Code   18.2-95.  On appeal, Noel contends the trial
court erred in ruling that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to a jury.  
Finding appellate review procedurally barred, we affirm the convictions.
As the parties are fully conversant with the record in this case and because this
memorandum opinion carries no precedential value, this opinion recites only those facts and
incidents of the proceedings as are necessary to the parties' understanding of the disposition of this
appeal.


I.  PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The relevant facts in this appeal are not in dispute.  Noel was arrested on March 19, 2002,
and charged with three counts of credit card theft, one count of credit card fraud, and two counts of
grand larceny.  On March 20, 2002, the General District Court of Henrico County appointed an
attorney to represent Noel on these charges.  Following a preliminary hearing on May 29, 2002, the
Commonwealth, Noel, and Noel's attorney executed a written "Agreement Setting Case(s) for
Trial" in the Circuit Court of Henrico County (trial court) on August 15, 2002, at 9:30 a.m., without
a jury.  On July 8, 2002, the grand jury indicted Noel on these charges, and an additional charge
each of credit card theft and credit card fraud.  On that day, the Commonwealth and Noel appeared
before the trial court on the two new charges.  Noel's attorney, appointed that day, was not present.  
The trial court continued the new charges to August 15, 2002, at 9:30 a.m. for trial without a jury, to
be tried together with Noel's other charges.  The trial court entered an order on July 10, 2002,
memorializing these actions.
On August 15, 2002, the Commonwealth, Noel, and Noel's attorney appeared before the
trial court for trial.  The clerk inquired whether the defense was ready for trial.  Noel's attorney
responded:
If Your Honor please, I'm ready to try the case.  I don't
believe my client is ready to go forward.  Judge, to the extent that I
may or may not know of what he expects to do, I'm not prepared in
that regard.

The trial judge stated, "Well, I guess we'll find out in a minute."  Noel was arraigned and pled not
guilty on all charges.
Following arraignment, the trial judge instructed the clerk to ask if Noel was "to be tried by
the court or by a jury."  The following colloquy then occurred:
THE CLERK:  Sir, on your pleas of not guilty to all the indictments
just read to you, do you wish to be tried by this court or by a jury?

THE DEFENDANT:  I don't know yet.

THE CLERK:  Thank you.

THE COURT:  I'm sorry, what was your answer?

THE DEFENDANT:  I said I don't know.

THE COURT:  How long will it take you to get to know?

A discussion then ensued between the trial judge and Noel in which Noel expressed
dissatisfaction with his attorney and questioned whether he was being adequately represented.  The
trial judge told Noel that the attorney appointed to represent him was an experienced trial attorney
who "handles a lot of serious cases and . . . does a very competent job."  Noel stated that he did not
"want to waste the court's time or these people's time" if he was guilty and that, if he had had an
attorney with whom he could communicate, "[t]his could have been taken care of."  The exchange
continued as follows:
THE COURT:  All right, call your first witness, sir.  We'll try the  
case without a jury.

THE DEFENDANT:  All right.

THE COURT:  Based on those statements.

[DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY]:  Pardon, Your Honor?

THE COURT:  Based on his statements, we'll try the case without a
jury.

[DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY]:  All right, Judge.  If Your Honor
please, I would have a motion for exclusion.

The case then proceeded to trial, and Noel was convicted on all counts.


II.  ANALYSIS
On appeal, Noel contends the trial court erred in ruling that he knowingly, intelligently, and
voluntarily waived his right to a jury trial, a finding not entered of record.1  During oral argument,
Noel's counsel conceded that Noel never affirmatively asked for a jury trial and never objected to
the trial court's determination to try the case without a jury based on Noel's statements or to trying
the case without a finding on the record that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his
right to a jury trial.  The Commonwealth contends that Noel's claim is procedurally barred by Rule
5A:18 because he did not raise it in the trial court.  We agree with the Commonwealth.
Rule 3A:13(b) provides, in relevant part, that an accused who pleads not guilty in a circuit
court may consent to a trial without a jury.  When such consent is given, the trial court must
determine that the consent was given voluntarily and intelligently and enter its finding of record
before trial.  However, "[i]f a defendant wishes to challenge the voluntary and intelligent nature of
his jury trial waiver, he must state a timely objection on that basis in the circuit court."  Williams v.
Commonwealth, 262 Va. 661, 669, 552 S.E.2d 760, 763 (2001).
Here, Noel was arrested and initially charged with three counts of credit card theft, one
count of credit card fraud, and two counts of grand larceny.  Following a preliminary hearing, Noel
and his attorney signed an agreement setting the cases for trial in the circuit court, without a jury, on
August 15, 2002.  On July 8, 2002, Noel was present in the circuit court when the new charges of
credit card theft and credit card fraud were set for trial without a jury on the same date as his
original charges.  The Commonwealth and Noel's attorney appeared on August 15, 2002, ready for
trial without a jury.  Prior to trial, Noel entered pleas of not guilty on all charges and was advised of
his right to a jury trial.  When asked whether he wished to be tried by the court or by a jury, Noel
responded, "I don't know yet."  A lengthy dialogue occurred between the trial judge and Noel
during which Noel's focus was on his dissatisfaction with his attorney.  At no time did Noel state
that he wanted to be tried by a jury.  At the conclusion of the dialogue, the trial judge determined,
"based on [Noel's] statements," to try the cases without a jury.  In response to this determination by
the trial court, both Noel and his attorney stated, "All right."
Noel concedes that he did not apprise the trial court of his argument, made for the first time
on appeal, that his agreement to be tried by the court was not a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary
waiver of his right to a jury trial.  Thus, having failed to state a timely objection in the circuit court,
Noel has not preserved this issue for appeal.  Id.; see also Rule 5A:18; Ohree v. Commonwealth, 26
Va. App. 299, 308, 494 S.E.2d 484, 488 (1988) (holding that we will not address an issue raised for
the first time on appeal).  Moreover, the record does not reflect any reason to invoke the good cause
or ends of justice exceptions to Rule 5A:18.
Accordingly, we affirm Noel's convictions.
Affirmed.
* Pursuant to Code   17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
1 Noel further argues in his appellate brief that he never stated he was, in fact, waiving his
right to a jury trial.  Thus, he contends he did not expressly consent to a trial without a jury.  
Because the issue whether Noel voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial is the
only "Question Presented" and the only one for which an appeal was granted, we do not address
this argument.





- 5 -

Ask a Lawyer

 

 

FREE CASE REVIEW BY A LOCAL LAWYER!
|
|
\/

Personal Injury Law
Accidents
Dog Bite
Legal Malpractice
Medical Malpractice
Other Professional Malpractice
Libel & Slander
Product Liability
Slip & Fall
Torts
Workplace Injury
Wrongful Death
Auto Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bankruptcy
Chapter 7
Chapter 11
Business/Corporate Law
Business Formation
Business Planning
Franchising
Tax Planning
Traffic/Transportation Law
Moving Violations
Routine Infractions
Lemon Law
Manufacturer Defects
Securities Law
Securities Litigation
Shareholder Disputes
Insider Trading
Foreign Investment
Wills & Estates

Wills

Trusts
Estate Planning
Family Law
Adoption
Child Abuse
Child Custody
Child Support
Divorce - Contested
Divorce - Uncontested
Juvenile Criminal Law
Premarital Agreements
Spousal Support
Labor/Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Sexual Harassment
Age Discrimination
Workers Compensation
Real Estate/Property Law
Condemnation / Eminent Domain
Broker Litigation
Title Litigation
Landlord/Tenant
Buying/Selling/Leasing
Foreclosures
Residential Real Estate Litigation
Commercial Real Estate Litigation
Construction Litigation
Banking/Finance Law
Debtor/Creditor
Consumer Protection
Venture Capital
Constitutional Law
Discrimination
Police Misconduct
Sexual Harassment
Privacy Rights
Criminal Law
DUI / DWI / DOI
Assault & Battery
White Collar Crimes
Sex Crimes
Homocide Defense
Civil Law
Insurance Bad Faith
Civil Rights
Contracts
Estate Planning, Wills & Trusts
Litigation/Trials
Social Security
Worker's Compensation
Probate, Will & Trusts
Intellectual Property
Patents
Trademarks
Copyrights
Tax Law
IRS Disputes
Filing/Compliance
Tax Planning
Tax Power of Attorney
Health Care Law
Disability
Elder Law
Government/Specialty Law
Immigration
Education
Trade Law
Agricultural/Environmental
IRS Issues

 


Google
Search Rominger Legal


 


LEGAL HELP FORUM - Potential Client ? Post your question.
LEGAL HELP FORUM - Attorney? Answer Questions, Maybe get hired!

NOW - CASE LAW - All 50 States - Federal Courts - Try it for FREE


 


Get Legal News
Enter your Email


Preview

We now have full text legal news
drawn from all the major sources!!

ADD A SEARCH ENGINE TO YOUR PAGE!!!

TELL A FRIEND ABOUT ROMINGER LEGAL

Ask Your Legal Question Now.

Pennsylvania Lawyer Help Board

Find An Attorney

TERMS OF USE - DISCLAIMER - LINKING POLICIES

Created and Developed by
Rominger Legal
Copyright 1997 - 2010.

A Division of
ROMINGER, INC.