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.
8 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jackson v. Stategreen1 sentence2008See, *77 e.g., Jackson v. State, 853 N.E.2d 138 (Ind.Ct.App.2006) (where trial court erroneously informed defendant he could not appeal his sentence, defendant presents plausible entitlement to a belated appeal under Post-Conviction Rule 2); Baysinger v. State, 835 N.E.2d 223, 226 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (defendant was entitled to file a belated notice of appeal because “the trial court failed to inform [him] of his right to appeal his sentence and instead informed him that by pleading guilty he was giving up ‘most’ of his grounds for appeal”). | 1 | 1 |
Baysinger v. Stategreen1 sentence2008See, *77 e.g., Jackson v. State, 853 N.E.2d 138 (Ind.Ct.App.2006) (where trial court erroneously informed defendant he could not appeal his sentence, defendant presents plausible entitlement to a belated appeal under Post-Conviction Rule 2); Baysinger v. State, 835 N.E.2d 223, 226 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (defendant was entitled to file a belated notice of appeal because “the trial court failed to inform [him] of his right to appeal his sentence and instead informed him that by pleading guilty he was giving up ‘most’ of his grounds for appeal”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Creech v. State
green
2 sentences2017Further, although the trial judge erroneously advised the defendant at the end of the sentencing hearing that he had a right to appeal, our supreme court concluded the advisement had no effect on his plea because “[the Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 84A01-1702-CR-265 | October 30, 2017 Page 5 of 6 defendant] had already pled guilty and received the benefit of his bargain.” Id. at 77 .1 [9] Here, Leffler executed a valid waiver of his right to appeal his sentence and the trial court advised him that he was waiving this right at the guilty plea hearing. 2017Further, although the trial judge erroneously advised Creech at the end of the sentencing hearing that he had a right to appeal, the Court concluded the advisement did not make a difference because “Creech had already pled guilty and received the benefit of his bargain.” Id. at 77 . [15] In the current case, the waiver clause in the parties’ plea agreement closely tracks the waiver clause in Creech. | 4 | 2015–2019 |
United States v. Wayne P. Williams
green
1 sentence2015Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
United States v. Dennis L. Wenger
green
1 sentence2013Instead, he argued that “his otherwise knowing and voluntary plea lost its knowing and voluntary status because the judge told him at the end of the sentencing hearing that he could appeal.” Id. (footnote omitted). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Anglin v. State
green
1 sentence2004"At the end of the sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered Anglin to wait in the hall for the transport officer from the Sheriff's Department to come and pick him up." Id. at 1015 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
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.