Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A plea colloquy, in United States criminal procedure, is a conversation between a judge and a criminal defendant who has been sworn under oath, which must occur when the defendant enters a guilty plea in court in order for the plea to be valid. [1] The United States Supreme Court has crafted a doctrine which requires the court to engage in a ...
Colloquy (law) In law, a colloquy is a routine, highly formalized conversation. [1] Conversations among the judge and lawyers (as opposed to testimony under oath) are colloquies. The term may be applied to the conversation that takes place when a defendant enters into a plea bargain and the judge is supposed to verify that the defendant ...
A criminal defendant in a state proceeding has a constitutional right to knowingly refuse the aid of an attorney. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.
Washington pled guilty in a Florida trial court to an indictment that included three capital murder charges. During the plea colloquy, Washington admitted to some past burglaries. He told the trial he had no significant criminal record and committed the crimes under extreme stress caused by his inability to support his family.
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), was a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court held that "in order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid, a §1983 plaintiff must prove that the conviction or sentence has been reversed on direct appeal ...
In August 2007, Galin Frye was arrested and charged with driving without a license for the third time, making it a felony in Missouri.The prosecutor in the case sent Frye's attorney two plea offers; one to recommend a three-year sentence with Frye serving only ten days in jail if he pleaded guilty to the felony, and the second to reduce the felony to a misdemeanor, and Frye to serve 90 days in ...
VI. Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (2004), [1] was a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that clarified how well-informed a defendant had to be to waive their right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment. [2] The defendant in this case had waived his right to counsel and pled guilty to drunk driving, and then had been ...
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States, the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty (exculpatory evidence).