Commonwealth v. Cross
Commonwealth v. Cross
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Essentially, appellant raises the question of whether his waiver of right to counsel prior to a tender of a guilty plea was knowing and voluntary.
Appellant was charged with driving during suspension of license and while under the influence of intoxicants. Appellant entered a guilty plea after an exten
Appellant contends that he did not realize the importance of counsel, that he was assured by a bail bondsman that one was not necessary, and that he would not receive a prison sentence. The validity of these contentions is dubious when the colloquy and record are examined. We are unable to find any error by the trial court and are at a loss to determine just what else the trial judge could have done.
Judgment of sentence is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.