Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Hanson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 26, 2001No. 99-3142-CRPublished

1DissentN. Patrick Crooks, J.

¶ 48. (dissenting). I cannot join the majority opinion because it abandons a long-standing rule of Wisconsin law — that a plea of no contest waives all non-jurisdictional challenges. The majority does not provide a valid legal reason for its *428failure to apply the waiver rule. The majority opinion also ignores clear information in the record when it reaches the conclusion that a remand is necessary.

¶ 49. It is a well-established principle that a plea of no contest or guilty waives all non-jurisdictional defenses and defects. State v. Bangert, 131 Wis. 2d 246, 293, 389 N.W.2d 12 (1986); State v.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. BangertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986
  2. State v. Escalona-NaranjoWisconsin Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State v. Princess Cinema of Milwaukee, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Hawkins v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  5. State v. DamaskeCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1997

6 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