Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hindmangreen2 sentences2019“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the 23 nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.” State v. Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d 778, 782 (Iowa 2000); see also State v. Hindman, 441 N.W.2d 770, 772 (Iowa 1989) (allowing that a limited inquiry may be sufficient depending on the circumstances). 2003See State v. Cooley, 608 N.W.2d 9, 15 (Iowa 2000) (stating the “trial court’s inquiry may vary depending on the nature of the offense and the background of the accused”); Hindman, 441 N.W.2d at 772 (“The degree of inquiry which is required ... varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.”). | 4 | 5 |
State v. Stephensongreen2 sentences2022“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.” Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d at 782 . 2019“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the 23 nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.” State v. Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d 778, 782 (Iowa 2000); see also State v. Hindman, 441 N.W.2d 770, 772 (Iowa 1989) (allowing that a limited inquiry may be sufficient depending on the circumstances). | 4 | 5 |
State v. Cooleygreen2 sentences2007See Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d at 782 (“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.”); Cooley, 608 N.W.2d at 15 (noting “ ‘a judge must investigate as long and as thoroughly as the circumstances of the case before him demand’ ” (citation omitted)). 2007See Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d at 782 (“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.”); Cooley, 608 N.W.2d at 15 (noting “ ‘a judge must investigate as long and as thoroughly as the circumstances of the case before him demand’ ” (citation omitted)). | 4 | 5 |
Hannan v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See Hannan v. State, 732 N.W.2d 45, 53 (Iowa 2007) (“The surrounding circumstances will determine the sufficiency of a colloquy.”); Majeres, 722 N.W.2d at 182 (“A defendant requires less rigorous warnings as to the waiver of plea counsel than for the waiver of trial counsel.”); Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d at 782 (“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.”). 2016“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.” Hannah v. State, 732 N.W.2d 45, 53 (Iowa 2007) (citation omitted). [Where] the offense is readily understood by laypersons and the penalty is not unduly severe, the duty of inquiry which is imposed upon the court is only that which is required to assure an awareness of right to counsel and a willingness to proceed without counsel in the face of such awareness. | 3 | 4 |
State v. Majeresgreen2 sentences2017See Hannan v. State, 732 N.W.2d 45, 53 (Iowa 2007) (“The surrounding circumstances will determine the sufficiency of a colloquy.”); Majeres, 722 N.W.2d at 182 (“A defendant requires less rigorous warnings as to the waiver of plea counsel than for the waiver of trial counsel.”); Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d at 782 (“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.”). 2014See Hannon, 732 N.W.2d at 53 ; Majerus, 722 N.W.2d 179, 182 (Iowa 2006); Cooley, 608 N.W.2d at 15 ; State v. Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d 778, 782 (Iowa 2000). | 2 | 2 |
Patterson v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2019The United States Supreme Court has taken a “pragmatic approach” to the waiver-of-counsel question and to evaluating “the type of warnings and procedures that should be required before a waiver of that right will be recognized.” Patterson v. Illinois, 487 U.S. 285, 298 (1988). 2003In Patterson v. Illinois, 487 U.S. 285 , 108 S.Ct. 2889 , 101 L.Ed.2d 261 (1988), the United States Supreme Court, considering the level of inquiry required in postin-dictment questioning, reasoned: [W]e have taken a more pragmatic approach to the waiver question — asking what purposes a lawyer can serve at the particular stage of the proceedings in question, and what assistance he could provide to an accused at that stage — to determine the scope of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and the type of warnings and procedures that should be required before a waiver of that right will be recog | 1 | 2 |
State v. Halsteadgreen1 sentence1985State v. Halstead, 362 N.W.2d 504, 508-09 (Iowa 1985). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hindmangreen2 sentences2019“The degree of inquiry necessary to assure a valid waiver varies with the 23 nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.” State v. Stephenson, 608 N.W.2d 778, 782 (Iowa 2000); see also State v. Hindman, 441 N.W.2d 770, 772 (Iowa 1989) (allowing that a limited inquiry may be sufficient depending on the circumstances). 2003See State v. Cooley, 608 N.W.2d 9, 15 (Iowa 2000) (stating the “trial court’s inquiry may vary depending on the nature of the offense and the background of the accused”); Hindman, 441 N.W.2d at 772 (“The degree of inquiry which is required ... varies with the nature of the offense and the ability of the accused to understand the process.”). | 1 | 5 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Castillo v. Texas
green
1 sentence2003In Patterson v. Illinois, 487 U.S. 285 , 108 S.Ct. 2889 , 101 L.Ed.2d 261 (1988), the United States Supreme Court, considering the level of inquiry required in postin-dictment questioning, reasoned: [W]e have taken a more pragmatic approach to the waiver question — asking what purposes a lawyer can serve at the particular stage of the proceedings in question, and what assistance he could provide to an accused at that stage — to determine the scope of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and the type of warnings and procedures that should be required before a waiver of that right will be recog | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Lewis J. Atley, A/K/A Gary J. Semeniuk v. John F. Ault, Warden, Asp, and the State of Iowa
green
2 sentences2000Atley v. Ault, 191 F.3d 865 (8th Cir.1999). 2000Atley v. Ault, 191 F.3d 865 (8th Cir.1999). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Rater
green
1 sentence2000Rater, 568 N.W.2d at 660 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.