Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Williams

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 3, 2002No. 00-0535-CRPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJon E Wilcox, J.

¶ 60. (concurring in part, dissenting in part). I agree with the court's holdings in sections I and II. However, I disagree with the majority's conclusion that the State materially and substantially breached the plea agreement in this case. The majority's decision on that issue gives insufficient consideration to the long-standing policy of making all relevant information available to a sentencing judge, *527and it will substantially hamper the State's ability to negotiate plea agreements in the future. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

¶ 61. As the majority notes, the prosecutor in a…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. State v. BangertWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Elias v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Farrar v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971

10 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