State v. Sugg

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “all the circumstances surrounding the interrogation” should be considered, including a suspect’s “age, experience, education, background, and intelligence”
• finding the State’s closing was proper when it suggested a plausible inference from the evidence
• finding waiver form stating “we have no way of giving you a lawyer, but one will be appointed for you if you wish, if and when you go to court” sufficient to inform defendant of his constitutional rights
• “Thus, when a constitutional right is at stake, its waiver must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.”
• the unambiguous mandate of Rule 11 prohibits the participation of the judge in plea negotiations under any circumstances; it is a rule that admits of no exceptions
• “Rule 11(e)(1) prohibits absolutely a trial court from all forms of judicial participation in or interference with the plea negotiation process.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).