Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Oliver

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 13, 1989No. 87-940Published

1DissentShanahan, J.

Notwithstanding the axiom that a conviction based on a defendant’s plea is either constitutionally valid or invalid, the majority’s opinion is somewhat a judicial shell game which requires a defendant to locate the procedural pellet for challenging the constitutionality of the defendant’s prior plea-based conviction. Fundamental unfairness occurs, however, because there is no pellet to be uncovered.

The majority notes the statement in Gonzales v. Grammer, 848 F.2d 894, 896 n.3 (8th Cir. 1988): “A state is at liberty to set up whatever procedural requirements it deems necessary for processing…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. McCarthy v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Burgett v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. State v. HolsworthWashington Supreme Court · 1980

8 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