No. 2122 Philadelphia 1981, No. 1828 Philadelphia 1982, Appeals from the Order and Judgment of Sentence of the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, of Luzerne County at No. 120/125, 202, 216 of 1981 and from the Judgment of Sentence at No. 120 of 1981.
Jonathan Blum, Assistant Public Defender, Wilkes-Barre, for appellant.
Joseph Giebus, Assistant District Attorney, Wilkes-Barre, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Wickersham, Watkins and Montgomery, JJ.
[ 327 Pa. Super. Page 442]
On April 13, 1981, appellant, Robert David, appeared before the Honorable Arthur D. Dalessandro and entered pleas of guilty to the following charges (Record 7-8):
No. 120 of 1981, Theft by Deception;
No. 121 of 1981, Forgery;
No. 122 of 1981, Theft by Deception;
No. 123 of 1981, Forgery;
No. 124 of 1981, Theft by Deception;
No. 125 of 1981, Forgery;
No. 202 of 1981, Theft by Deception;
No. 216 of 1981, Forgery.
[ 327 Pa. Super. Page 443]
Sentencing was set for June 2, 1981.
At the April 13, 1981 hearing, the following testimony occurred:
Mr. PODCASY: If it please the Court; your Honor, concerning criminal information No. 202 of 1981 my understanding is that on November 29, 1980, the defendant and Mr. Cupp went to the residence of one Robert Leggett at which they secured certain checks and moneys amounting to $260.00. The checks owned by Mr. Leggett were issued by the Nevada National Bank. Mr. Leggett at no time authorized the defendant to have or use the checks or to take them originally.
MR. BLUM: Your Honor, for the purpose of clarification, on the charge on 202 of 1981 involving Mr. Cupp, [co-defendant], the reason the burglary and the criminal conspiracy are not being plead is because Mr. David was the driver of the car and did not enter the residence or apartment building. Aside from that I have no questions of the District Attorney. I would like to get a figure from the bank of what is owed.
THE COURT: I have a figure that indicates that this man has taken $11,410.00 in seven days and that a total of $1,630.00 a day was taken.
THE COURT: The Court finds that the defendant's participation in the plea bargain agreement and the tender of guilty pleas as set forth by the Assistant District Attorney, and as verified by the Court's inquiry of the defendant, was done voluntarily, intelligently and understandingly and after consultation with trial counsel.
The Court finds that this defendant is an intelligent person who is fully aware of all of his rights and is fully aware of everything that has happened concerning his appearance in court today.
[ 327 Pa. Super. Page 444]
Guilty Plea Transcript, April 13, 1981, at 17, 19, 27.*fn1
On June 2, 1981, the defendant again appeared before Judge Dalessandro, again represented by Jonathan Blum, Esquire, Assistant Public Defender. Mr. Blum informed the court that appellant wished to withdraw the guilty plea to No. 202 of 1981. After reviewing the informations and counts thereof to which appellant had pled guilty, the court denied the motion to withdraw the guilty plea:
"THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor.
"THE COURT: We went through very detailed explanations and proceedings when you submitted a plea of guilty on a number of charges on April 13th, 1981. They were very thoroughly and clearly explained to you. Also, there were a number of charges that were to be nol prossed, meaning dropped. I was completely convinced that you fully understood what was taking place and that you understood what you were doing. And I stated for the record my
[ 327 Pa. Super. Page 445]
conclusions as to the fact that you tendered the plea to the various charges knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily, understandingly and after consultation with Counsel. Now, Mr. Blum has stated that you want to withdraw your guilty pleas.
"THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor.
"THE COURT: What's the basis for that?
"THE DEFENDANT: At the time of my hearing last time, I didn't know if the witnesses that I have now, that I have talked to, that can indicate that I had no part in the theft ...