Legal Opinion

State v. Terning

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided February 7, 2020No. 119904PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

No. 119,904 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. AARON TERNING, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects defendants in criminal cases by requiring that any plea be knowingly and voluntarily made. As part of this protection, a court considering a defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere must inform the defendant of the direct consequences of his or her plea. The record must affirmatively disclose that the defendant understands the potential consequences of the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. State v. InghamSupreme Court of Kansas · 2018
  4. State v. EdgarSupreme Court of Kansas · 2006
  5. State v. MossmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 2012

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Macomber v. ClineCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2021
  2. State v. BarragerCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2020
  3. Terning (ID 93290) v. MeyerDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API