Commonwealth v. Hoffman

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Appellant claims that he was not represented by counsel at trial and that he did not make a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel. Appellant was told only that he was “entitled to counsel” and was not told that he could have free counsel if indigent. This advice was inadequate. See Commonwealth v. Ritchey, 431 Pa. 269, 245 A. 2d 446 (1968); Commonwealth v. Blose, 430 Pa. 209, 241 A. 2d 918 (1968).

The petition for allocatur is granted, the order of the Superior Court, affirming the denial of the petition under the Post Conviction Hearing Act, is reversed, the order of the…