Legal Opinion

Young v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1971No. State 32PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRobert W. Hansen, J.

The defendant seeks reversal because he did not receive probation, the sentence “contemplated” by the plea bargain which led to the change of plea.

Reliance is placed upon manifest injustice standard relating to withdrawal of guilty pleas, 1 approved by this court, 2 particularly the fourth fact situation therein referred to:

“(ii) Withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice whenever the defendant proves that: U
“(4) he did not receive the charge or sentence concessions contemplated by the plea agreement and the prosecuting attorney failed to seek or not to oppose these concessions…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. State v. WolfeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  3. State v. ChristopherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Gename v. BensonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. State v. WilliamsWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State v. McQuayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
  3. State v. HamptonWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Farrar v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Melby v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975

23 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