Willoughby v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that petitioner’s claim that his plea agreement was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent because his trial counsel failed to properly inform him of the single larceny rule fell under the first sub-category of the second category
• stating “it is immaterial whether [a defendant’s] claim is of an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel.”
• stating that if the post-conviction court finds that the petitioner would have pleaded guilty even if competently advised as to the penal consequences, the error in advice is immaterial to the decision to plead and there is no prejudice
• stating “it is immaterial whether [a defendant’s] claim is of an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel.”
• stating “it is immaterial whether [a defendant’s] claim is of an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel”
• \it is immaterial whether [a defendant's] claim is of an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).