Legal Opinion

Reiff v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1969No. State 20PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

In State v. Reppin (1967), 35 Wis. 2d 377, 151 N. W. 2d 9, this court restated and clarified the factors to be considered when reviewing the order of a trial court on a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty. It was therein pointed out that our previous holdings, notably Pulaski v. State (1964), 23 Wis. 2d 138, 126 N. W. 2d 625, established that a motion to withdraw a plea of guilty and for a new trial “is a motion ‘. . . directed to the discretion of the court in the interest of justice ....’” Reppin, supra, page 384.

We restated the Pulaski rule that:

“ ‘. . . the court will vacate a plea of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. ReppinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  2. State v. StricklandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Pulaski v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  4. State Ex Rel. Burnett v. BurkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Rafferty v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hatcher v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Drake v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Craker v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  4. State v. CarlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  5. State v. VieburgCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987

2 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