## Facts

- Mortimer Singer was indicted in federal court on 30 counts of mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, based on an alleged scheme using the mails to obtain money from amateur songwriters by promising marketing services.
- On the first day of trial, Singer submitted a written waiver of jury trial, stating it was offered to shorten the trial.
- Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23(a), a case must be tried by jury unless the defendant waives in writing with the approval of the court and the consent of the government.
- The trial judge was willing to approve the waiver, but the government refused to consent.
- Singer was tried by a jury and convicted on 29 of 30 counts.
- The Ninth Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the constitutionality of Rule 23(a)’s consent requirements.

## Issues

1. Whether a federal criminal defendant has an absolute constitutional right to waive a jury trial and require a bench trial, regardless of the government’s objection and the court’s view.
2. Whether Rule 23(a), by conditioning acceptance of a jury waiver on government consent and court approval, violates the Constitution.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment upholding Singer’s convictions.
- The Court held that Rule 23(a) is a reasonable procedure governing jury-trial waivers.
- The Court ruled that the Constitution guarantees an impartial jury trial, not a defendant-controlled choice of a bench trial.
- The Court concluded there is no constitutional barrier to requiring prosecutorial consent and judicial approval for a jury waiver when refusal results in an impartial jury trial.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant’s only constitutional right concerning the method of trial is to an impartial trial by jury.
- The ability to waive a constitutional right does not ordinarily include a right to insist on the opposite of that right.
- Waiver of constitutional rights may be subject to reasonable procedural regulation.
- Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23(a) permissibly requires a jury waiver to be in writing and accepted only with the trial court’s approval and the government’s consent.
- The government has a legitimate interest in insisting on a jury trial in cases it believes warrant conviction, and judicial approval helps prevent unfairness or manipulation of the adjudicative process.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld Rule 23(a)’s requirement of government consent and court approval for a defendant’s jury waiver, holding that a defendant has no constitutional entitlement to a bench trial on demand when an impartial jury trial remains available.


Singer v. United States, 380 U.S. 24 (1965)