Legal Opinion

Stamm v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 25, 1990No. 49A02-8812-CR-469PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SULLIVAN, Judge.

On February 10, 1984, Jeffrey A. Stamm (Stamm) pleaded guilty to operating a vehicle while intoxicated. He filed a petition for post-conviction relief on March 11, 1988, which was denied. Stamm appeals the court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief.

We reverse.

Stamm argues on appeal that his guilty plea was not knowing, intelligent or voluntary because the trial court failed to adequately advise him of his right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him.

The right to confrontation is conferred upon defendant by the Sixth Amendment to the United…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Coy v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Craig v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  4. Gleason v. St. Elizabeth Medical CenterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  5. Stewart v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1990

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Slone v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992
  2. State v. LimeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Hampton v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Slone v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API