Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Kale

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 25, 1983No. 683PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order denying four of five P.C.H.A. petitions, each of which sought to withdraw a separate plea of guilty. 1 The order was entered following a consolidated hearing at which appellant was represented by court appointed counsel. Appellant contends, as he did in the court below, that the guilty plea colloquies were defective in all instances for failing to recite the elements of the offenses to which pleas of guilty were being entered and that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to ensure that the guilty pleas were entered knowingly, intelligently…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ShafferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Commonwealth v. StarrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Commonwealth v. MartinezSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Commonwealth v. ShoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Commonwealth v. MinarikSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. OwensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Commonwealth v. BlagmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Commonwealth v. HairstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Commonwealth v. JacksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Commonwealth v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API