Opinion
March 1, 1968.
Criminal law — Constitutional law — 6th and 14th Amendments — Guilty plea — Validity — Lack of counsel — Waiver of constitutional right — Necessity of clear record — Post Conviction Hearing Act.
1. Where petitioner pleaded guilty in 1959 to charges of burglary, larceny and receiving stolen goods, and the record showed "The Court: I think you ought to have a lawyer. . . . Mr. Allen, the Court will appoint counsel for you. Do you want a lawyer? The Defendant: No, sir.", it was Held that the record did not prove petitioner's understanding and intelligent waiver of his constitutional right to the assistance of counsel.
2. Depending upon the particular circumstances of the case, the record must show, among other things, that the accused knew the nature of the crime charged against him, was advised or was aware of his right to counsel, and, if indigent or otherwise unable to secure counsel, that he was advised or was aware of his right to have assigned counsel and that the accused intelligently and understandingly rejected the services of counsel.
3. Where the accused enters a plea of guilty to a complicated offense the nature and completeness of the examination discussed in Commonwealth ex rel. McCray v. Rundle, 415 Pa. 65, is required.
Before BELL, C. J., MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.
Appeal, No. 321, Jan. T., 1968, from order of Superior Court, Oct. T., 1967, No. 630, affirming order of Court of Quarter Sessions of Montgomery County, Nov. T., 1957, No. 63, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Herbert B. Allen. Orders of Superior Court and Court of Quarter Sessions of Montgomery County reversed, and case remanded for new trial.
Same case in Superior Court: 211 Pa. Super. 259.
Proceeding under Post Conviction Hearing Act.
Order entered without hearing granting new trial on bill of indictment to which defendant entered plea of not guilty, and petition dismissed and new trial denied on bill to which defendant entered plea of guilty, opinion by HONEYMAN, J. Defendant appealed to Superior Court which affirmed order, opinion per curiam, dissenting opinion by HOFFMAN, J. Petition for allocatur filed in Supreme Court.
Dominic P. Costa, for petitioner.
Henry T. Crocker, Assistant District Attorney, with him Richard A. Devlin and Anthony J. Scirica, Assistant District Attorney, and Richard S. Lowe, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, respondent.
The Orders of the Superior Court and the Court of Quarter Sessions of Montgomery County are reversed, and the case is remanded for a new trial on Bill No. 63, November Sessions, 1957, on the dissenting opinion of Judge HOFFMAN of the Superior Court, at 211 Pa. Super. 259 at 260.