P. v. Klunk CA4/2
Defendant and appellant Daniel Patrick Klunk was convicted of making a criminal threat and found to have suffered six prison priors. (Pen. Code, §§ 422, subd. (a), 667.5, subd. (b); all undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) The prison priors were bifurcated from the trial on his substantive crime. Defendant waived jury trial on the prison priors, which were tried to the court. Defendant challenges his waiver, contending that the court “committed a structural error” in accepting the waiver because it failed to “sufficiently advise [him] as to the nature of the right he was waiving, and/or the possible consequences of waiving it.” We conclude his failure to object in the trial court forfeited this claim. We further determine that the record shows defendant was sufficiently advised of the consequences of waiving his right to a jury trial, and that he understood them. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment in its entirety.
Comments on P. v. Klunk CA4/2