Hollingshed v. State

Dissenting Opinion

Pivarnik, J.

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion for the same reasons stated in my dissent in Williams v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 373, 363 N.E.2d 971, and herein restate my position in that case.

Here, appellant’s claim is that he was not advised of Boykin rights and thus did not waive them, and that the record is for these reasons fatally defective. The guilty plea herein having been accepted in 1971, it occurred prior to the passage of Ind. Code § 35-4.1-1-3 (Burns 1975), requiring, among other things, specific advisement of Boykin rights by the judge to the…