Legal Opinion

State v. Biastock

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1969No. State 119PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.

The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s post-conviction motion to withdraw his plea of guilty.

In State v. Reppin, 1 this court adopted the “manifest injustice” test as set forth in the American Bar Association Project on Minimum Standards for Criminal Justice — Pleas of Guilty. 2

Under those standards a defendant should be permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty if he is able to prove that his plea was made under any of the following situations:

“ (1) [H] e was denied the effective assistance of counsel guaranteed to him by constitution,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Gilbert v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Foster v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. State v. ReppinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Ernst v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Nelson v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State v. RiekkoffWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Powell v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  5. State v. BarteltWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983

17 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