Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Lawrence v. Burke

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 1948PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

The referee recognized that there is a fundamental, absolute rule that a defendant in a criminal case shall be informed of the charge against him and of the fact that he is entitled to assistance of counsel. The controlling question, then, is whether the evidence sustains the referee’s finding that Paul Lawrence knew or should have known of his right to be represented by counsel and that he intelligently and competently waived his right to be so represented at the time he pleaded guilty.

The referee’s findings of fact cover petitioner’s history, conduct, career, and intelligence, so far as…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Porath v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895
  2. State ex rel. Willis v. PrinceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
  3. State Ex Rel. Wenzlaff v. BurkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Stewart v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1895
  5. In re Marchant's EstateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Babbitt v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  2. State v. BrittmanTennessee Supreme Court · 1982
  3. State v. TurpinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Seybold v. BurkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Monroe County Department of Human Services v. Kelli B.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2004

1 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