Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Lackershire

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 2007No. 2005AP1189-CRPublished

1DissentJon E Wilcox, J.

¶ 73. (dissenting). Lackershire moved to withdraw her plea on three grounds: (1) she did not understand the elements of the crime to which she pleaded guilty, (2) she was not made aware of the read-in charges, and (3) her pregnancy caused her to act involuntarily in entering her guilty plea.

*454¶ 74. When deciding Lackershire's motion, the judge addressed the grounds raised in it. For focusing on the motion made by the defendant, and failing to focus on the factual basis requirement that Lackershire herself did not even raise, the judge erred.

¶ 75. You did not misread that: for focusing on the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. BangertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986
  2. State v. BrownWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State v. ThomasWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Edwards v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  5. State v. HowellWisconsin Supreme Court · 2007

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