Legal Opinion

In RE DARNELL v. Timpani

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1966No. 38761PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Revelle, J. †

Professing innocence to his attorney, defendant pleaded not guilty to four counts of grand larceny. Eighty-two days later, he came before the court to permit him to change his plea from “not guilty” to “guilty” to one count. Sometime preceding the hearing, there had been a conference between his attorney and the prosecutor com ceming a change of plea. The hearing opened with a statement by defendant’s attorney:

[T]his morning Mr. Darnell is here in court for the purpose of changing his plea to guilty to one count of Grand Larceny. It is my understanding that the Prosecutor has so…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Vincent L. Pilkington v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1963
  2. Thorne v. CallahanWashington Supreme Court · 1951
  3. State v. HarrisWashington Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Louis Smith v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
  5. State v. BaforoWashington Supreme Court · 1928

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. TourtellotteWashington Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Commonwealth v. AlvaradoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. In Re the Personal Restraint of JamesWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Miller v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
  5. Garrison v. RhayWashington Supreme Court · 1968

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API