Spurlock, 19 Ill. App.3d at 475, 311 N.E.2d at 740. The court, however, vacated the judgments and remanded with directions to allow each defendant to withdraw his plea of guilty and to plead anew, based on the rule that a plea of guilty induced by unfulfilled promises loses its voluntary nature and is considered void. Spurlock, 19 Ill. App.3d at 475, 311 N.E.2d at 740; see also People v. Sims, 133 Ill. App.2d 878, 272 N.E.2d 433 (1971) (conviction affirmed where defense counsel indicated rulings could be appealed despite guilty plea, but trial court advised defendant that was wrong, and defendant entered guilty plea anyway). In People v. Green, 21 Ill. App.3d 1072, 316 N.E.2d 530 (1974), the defendant entered a negotiated plea, but defense counsel stated his intent that the plea not constitute any waiver of defendant's right to appeal the court's earlier denial of a motion to suppress confession.

Therefore, defendant reasons, he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel. A voluntary plea of guilty waives all errors or irregularities that are not jurisdictional. ( People v. Brown (1969), 41 Ill.2d 503, 244 N.E.2d 159.) Issues waived by a plea of guilty include the defendant's right to a speedy trial ( People v. Sims (5th Dist. 1971), 133 Ill. App.2d 878, 272 N.E.2d 433; People v. Sweeney (1951), 409 Ill. 223, 99 N.E.2d 143; People v. Lantz (1944), 387 Ill. 72, 55 N.E.2d 78); the violation of defendant's constitutional rights by the manner in which witnesses were allowed to view and identify ( People v. Stringfellow (1st Dist. 1972), 5 Ill. App.3d 944, 284 N.E.2d 496; People v. Bradford (1st Dist. 1971), 3 Ill. App.3d 81, 279 N.E.2d 34); the violation of defendant's rights in securing his confession by use of force by the police ( People v. Phelps (1972), 51 Ill.2d 35, 280 N.E.2d 203) and in violation of the mandates of Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U.S. 436, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, 86 S.Ct. 1602, ( People v. Sephus (1970), 46 Ill.2d 130, 262 N.E.2d 914); the failure of the court to appoint counsel for defendant at the preliminary hearing ( People v. Sephus (1970), 46 Ill.2d 130, 262 N.E.2d 914); and defenses ( People v. Young (1st Dist. 1974), 25 Ill. App.3d 629, 323 N.E.2d 788). A plea of guilty also waives any claims of conflict which arise due to defend

The defendant's contention is that the trial court should have admonished him that his guilty plea waived his right to appeal the issue of the court's ruling on the motion to suppress, otherwise his plea was qualified and not knowingly made. To support this contention, the defense cites two Fifth District appellate decisions, People v. Sims, 133 Ill. App.2d 878, 272 N.E.2d 443, and People v. Spurlock, 19 Ill. App.3d 474, 311 N.E.2d 739. The trial court in Sims did admonish the defendant that by pleading guilty he waived any error in the court's denial of his motion for discharge under the 120-day rule; however, the language of the court approving the trial court's admonition in that case cannot be interpreted as necessary for the court's decision nor as a mandate requiring such admonition by trial courts in all cases under the same or similar circumstances. In Spurlock, the State's attorney joined with defense counsel's misrepresentations of nonwaiver of errors on appeal of the court's ruling on non-jurisdictional motions by erroneously agreeing and expressly stating when the plea was accepted that the errors in such rulings would be preserved for purposes of appeal. There the misrepresentations of the State in addition to that of defense counsel, without admonishment by the court, would bring the plea of guilty within the line of cases holding that where a

The failure to raise this question below waived the appellant's right to be discharged. ( People v. White (1962), 25 Ill.2d 403, 186 N.E.2d 349; People v. Kluczynski (1965), 33 Ill.2d 412, 211 N.E.2d 687.) Furthermore, the appellant's plea of guilty waived any alleged right to discharge. People v. DeCola (1959), 15 Ill.2d 527, 155 N.E.2d 622; People v. Sims (1771), (Ill.App.2d), 272 N.E.2d 433. We therefore affirm.