State v. Barajas

Appellate tag lines must be read in the context of the opinion as a whole.

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction, contending that, on remand from this court, the trial court erred in denying her request for a jury trial. Defendant argued that on remand, the trial court was obligated to grant her an entirely new trial and that her waiver of a jury during the first trial did not effect her right to a jury trial on remand. Defendant was found guilty following a bench trial. Defendant's first appeal argued that the trial court improperly denied her right to a closing argument. This court held the trial court improperly denied Defendant's right to a closing argument, reversing and remanding. On remand, Defendant requested a jury trial. The trial court denied her request, and only permitted her to make a closing argument. This court held on the initial appeal that Defendant was entitled to an entirely new trial, given the nature of the right denied. Although the trial court is generally granted broad discretion on remand, the first appellate decision, read as a whole, entitled Defendant to a new trial, not just a closing argument. Once the case was remanded for a new trial, the case was "returned to its original pretrial posture" and therefore Defendant was once again entitled to the right to a jury trial. Reversed and remanded.