State v. Hall

381 N.W.2d 926, 222 Neb. 51, 1986 Neb. LEXIS 859
Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided February 21, 1986·No. 85-558·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant’s sole assignment of error is that the district court accepted his plea of nolo contendere and sentenced him to a term of imprisonment for a felony on a trial record which was totally silent concerning whether defendant had knowledge of the maximum and minimum penalties which could be imposed, and without the court’s making a finding that defendant had voluntarily and intelligently waived his rights by so pleading.

The State, in effect, confesses error. Accordingly, as required *52 by State v. Fischer, 218 Neb. 678, 357 N.W.2d 477 (1984), and State v. Curnyn, 202 Neb. 135, 274 N.W.2d 157 (1979), we remand the cause to the district court for further proceedings as mandated by those cases.

Remanded for further proceedings.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Hall, 381 N.W.2d 926, 222 Neb. 51, 1986 Neb. LEXIS 859 (Neb. 1986).

381 N.W.2d 926 (State v. Hall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. James
573 N.W.2d 816 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
State v. War Bonnett
428 N.W.2d 508 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1988)