State v. WoodsState v. Woods
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent.
The right to confront one’s accusers is guaranteed by both the federal and our state constitutions and is waived by a guilty plea.
In this case, the trial judge’s only reference to defendant’s confrontation right is as follows: “You understand that you are presumed innocent, and the State must call its witnesses and prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” The defendant is not told that he is entitled to confront the state’s witnesses, personally observing their testimony as well as subjecting them to cross-examination. I agree that the word “confront” need not be used, however, I cannot agree with the majority, that the brief remark above by the trial judge constitutes a sufficient alternative explanation upon which to base a valid waiver.