Did appellant properly waive his right to a jury trial and an omnibus hearing?
II. Did appellant waive his right to testify in his defense, and if so, was the waiver proper? III. Did the admission of show-up evidence violate appellants due-process rights to a fair trial? IV. Was there sufficient evidence to support the district courts finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? D E C I S I O N I. Appellant contends that he was not fully and effectively informed of his rights to a jury trial and to an omnibus hearing. Under Minn. R. Juv. P. 19.07, any juvenile subject to EJJ prosecution is entitled to a jury trial pursuant to Minn. R. Crim. P. 26. See also Minn. Stat. 260B.130, subd. 3 (2002). The right to a jury trial is fundamental and must be personally waived by the defendant. State v. Halseth, 653 N.W.2d 782, 786 (Minn. App. 2002). The defendant may waive the right to a jury trial in writing or orally in court. Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.01, subd. 1(2)(a). Interpreting the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review. State v. Nerz, 58
