Commonwealth v. Gray

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Gray

249 A.2d 362, 213 Pa. Super. 777

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 6, 1968·No. Appeal, No. 72·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam:

It appearing that petitioner’s plea of nolo contendere, without counsel, was introduced at his trial (White v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 59 (1963)), the order is vacated and the record remanded for a hearing to determine if appellant waived counsel at his preliminary hearing. If the court finds an intelligent waiver, appellant is not entitled to relief. In the event the court finds no intelligent waiver of counsel at the preliminary hearing, appellant is entitled to a new trial. Commonwealth ex rel. Firmstone v. Myers, 431 Pa. 628, 246 A. 2d 371 (1968).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion

Per Curiam:

It appearing that petitioner’s plea of nolo contendere, without counsel, was introduced at his trial (White v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 59 (1963)), the order is vacated and the record remanded for a hearing to determine if appellant waived counsel at his preliminary hearing. If the court finds an intelligent waiver, appellant is not entitled to relief. In the event the court finds no intelligent waiver of counsel at the preliminary hearing, appellant is entitled to a new trial. Commonwealth ex rel. Firmstone v. Myers, 431 Pa. 628, 246 A. 2d 371 (1968).

Commonwealth v. Gray, 249 A.2d 362, 213 Pa. Super. 777 (Pa. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

249 A.2d 362 (Commonwealth v. Gray) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related