In Wilson, 698 S.W.2d at 147 the Court noted that it had not held in Fairfield that an expressed desire of a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea and enter a plea of not guilty acted as a revocation of a [prior] jury trial waiver. And the court stated the court of appeals had erred to so state.

But, if a new trial is granted despite a guilty plea (e.g., Eldridge, 261 S.W.2d 579), the case is restored to its position before the former trial, including pretrial proceedings. And the cases say that granting a motion to withdraw a guilty plea is the functional equivalent of granting a new trial (and presumably the converse is true).

So, does an order granting a new trial after a plea of guilty necessarily reinvest the defendant with the right to trial by jury as held by the court in Bullard, 548 S.W.2d at 19-20 with respect to cases on remand (stating the waiver of a jury on one trial generally does not affect the right to demand one on the second trial)? Or is the defendant bound by the earlier waiver despite the change in plea upon retrial (at least if he fails to specifically avoid or request relief from the earlier waiver)? I am hoping maybe someone has crossed this bridge. I am fearful of arguing there is not now a right to trial by jury, but the movant did not ask for that relief in the motion for new trial, so ....