Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Dodson

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided July 12, 1996No. S-94-1249Published

1DissentWright, J.

I respectfully disagree with the finding of the majority that Dodson was never informed that he had a right to counsel at the time of entering his guilty pleas.

If, as the majority states, Dodson was incorrectly informed by the court that he did not have a right to counsel unless he pled not guilty, how did this information prejudice Dodson? Dodson was advised that if he pled not guilty, a lawyer would be appointed for him. Had Dodson been advised that he could not have a lawyer prior to entering a plea, I would agree that he was prejudiced and should be entitled to a new trial. Instead,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Fay v. NoiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Rice v. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. State v. IrishNebraska Supreme Court · 1986
  5. State v. TimmermanNebraska Supreme Court · 1992

10 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