Commonwealth v. Williams
Commonwealth v. Williams
Opinion of the Court
Opinion
Order affirmed.
Concurring in Part
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by
Appellant pleaded guilty to eleven indictments charging burglary, larceny, and receiving stolen goods; carrying a concealed deadly weapon; and carrying a firearm in a motor vehicle without a license. After waiving a jury trial, appellant was tried and found guilty on two indictments charging assault, assault with intent to kill, and committing crimes of violence while armed. Appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for five to ten years each on four of the guilty plea counts with the sentences to run consecutively. Sentence was suspended on the other indictments.
Although the lower court correctly stated the rule for guilty pleas, in nonpleas cases “[w]here the trial record is silent with regard to a defendant’s knowledge of his appellate rights, the burden of proof in a collateral proceeding is upon the Commonwealth to show that his rights were knowingly and intelligently waived. In order to establish such a waiver, it must be shown that the accused knew of his absolute right to appeal and that he knew of the right to have counsel appointed for him if indigent.” Commonwealth v. Rawls, 217 Pa. Superior Ct. 123, 268 A. 2d 121 (1970). The lower court opinion indicates that appellant’s lack of knowledge of his right to appeal was irrelevant because he was not serving a sentence on the indictments to which he plead not guilty.
Despite the fact that appellant is not being punished directly by a sentence for these two indictments, a felony conviction itself entails significant “collateral consequences”. With a crime of violence on his record, appellant will find obtaining a job extremely difficult. He may be denied various permits and licenses, and the opportunity to join the armed forces. The parole board
Accordingly, I would affirm as to the guilty plea indictments, and vacate the order below as to indictments Nos. 558 and 559 of January Sessions, 1954, and grant appellant the right to file post-trial motions nunc pro tunc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.