Is a plaintiff entitled to a punitive award in his motor vehicle accident case?

Hartunian asserts first that the punitive damages award must be reversed because the jury that decided his liability did not decide punitive damages. The general rule that the same trier of fact who decided liability must decide punitive damages (Civ. Code, 3295, subd. (d)) does not apply here, because Hartunian waived a jury trial on the damage issue. (See Medo v. Superior Court (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 64 [defendant can waive the "same jury" requirement].) Hartunian concedes his waiver but contends it was not knowing. Nothing in the record supports that contention.