# Commonwealth v. Henderson

> Superior Court of Pennsylvania · April 16, 1982 · 298 Pa. Super. 180

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9762288

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. James Robert HENDERSON, Appellant
- **Court:** Superior Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** April 16, 1982
- **Citations:** 298 Pa. Super. 180; 444 A.2d 720; 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 4022
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wieand
- **Judges:** Brosky, Wieand, Montemuro
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9762288

## Opinion text

WIEAND, Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. This is not a “borderline case.” Appellant’s assertion that trial counsel promised him a “county time” sentence in return for a plea of guilty is patently frivolous. Such a promise is contradicted by appel *184 lant’s express representations to the contrary at the time of the guilty plea colloquy. “A criminal defendant who elects to plead quilty has a duty to answer questions truthfully. We cannot permit a defendant to postpone the final disposition of his case by lying to the court and later alleging that his lies were induced by the prompting [or ineffectiveness] of counsel.” Commonwealth v. Brown, 242 Pa.Superior Ct. 240, 247, 363 A.2d 1249, 1253 (1976).
Becausé appellant’s PCHA assertion is flatly and unequivocally contradicted by his own statements made during the guilty plea colloquy, I would affirm the order dismissing the PCHA petition without a hearing.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9762288. Public record. Not legal advice.