Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2/12/1975
State v. Armstrong
Citations
- 211 S.E.2d 889
- 263 S.C. 594
- 1975 S.C. LEXIS 424
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- determining that the \essence of Boykin was to make the requirements of Rule 11 [of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure] applicable to the states\
- determining that the A essence of Boykin was to make the requirements of Rule 11 [of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure] applicable to the states @
- stating the defendant must be apprised of the direct consequences, which are the direct and immediate results, of his guilty plea
- trial court must give defendant adequate warning of the consequences of guilty plea, and that warning must include an explanation of the defendants waiver of constitutional rights and a realistic picture of all sentencing possibilities.
- trial court must give defendant adequate warning of the consequences of guilty plea, and that warning must include an explanation of the defendants waiver of constitutional rights and a realistic picture of all sentencing possibilities.
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Ness, Moss, Lewis, Bussey, Littlejohn
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Houston v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2006-08-10· cited 80×
- Davis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1976-07-07· cited 62×
- State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2007-10-19· cited 59×
- State v. ReavesSupreme Court of Iowa· 1977-05-25· cited 57×
- State v. LambertSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1976-05-05· cited 31×
- Reed v. BeckaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1999-01-18· cited 26×
- Harres v. LeekeSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1984-07-24· cited 26×
- State v. EaslerCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1996-05-13· cited 23×
- Anderson v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-08-07· cited 21×
- State v. LopezCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2002-12-09· cited 16×
- In the Interest of Arisha K.S.Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1998-05-11· cited 13×
- State v. TuckerCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2008-01-16· cited 10×
- Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2008-06-05· cited 7×
- State v. RikardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2006-10-02· cited 7×
- Gaines v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1999-06-21· cited 5×
- Garren v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2018-04-25· cited 5×
- LoPiano v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1978-04-17· cited 4×
- Anton Devon Nikkynuebe Houston AKA Anton N. Robertson v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2006-08-10
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1969-06-02· cited 12,640×
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1970-05-04· cited 7,191×
- McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court· 1970-05-04· cited 5,113×
- Kercheval v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1927-05-16· cited 1,174×
- Parker v. North CarolinaSupreme Court· 1970-05-04· cited 759×
- State v. NorrisSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1969-07-02· cited 33×
- Thompson v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1966-11-14· cited 5×
- Silas v. BowenD. South Carolina· 1967-12-21· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.