Com. v. Forbes, L., 1951 WDA 2015

Leonard James Forbes pled no-contest on October 29, 2013 to two counts of burglary and two counts of terroristic threats in exchange for a 5–10 year state prison sentence (a firm bargain). He was sentenced the same day.
Nearly a year later Forbes, through appointed counsel, filed an amended PCRA petition alleging plea counsel was ineffective and that his plea was therefore not knowing, intelligent, or voluntary.
The PCRA court held evidentiary hearings on May 11, July 2, and September 3, 2015, and denied relief on November 13, 2015. Forbes appealed.
At the PCRA hearings plea counsel testified he had explained the defense theory, the weaknesses of that defense (including an eyewitness daughter), and the difference between guilty and no-contest pleas; counsel also testified Forbes chose no-contest to avoid admitting guilt and to prevent his daughter from testifying.
The record included a signed written plea agreement and an on-the-record colloquy in which Forbes acknowledged understanding his rights, that pleading was voluntary, and that he had no questions about the plea agreement.
The PCRA court found plea counsel credible and concluded Forbes plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary; the Superior Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plea counsel was ineffective causing an unknowing/involuntary plea	Forbes argued counsel gave inaccurate/confusing advice, depriving him of a knowing, voluntary plea and entitling him to withdraw the plea	Commonwealth/PCRA court argued counsel credibly advised Forbes of defenses, risks, and plea consequences; Forbes colloquy and signed plea form show understanding	Court held Forbes failed to meet ineffective-assistance burden; plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, so PCRA relief denied

Commonwealth v. Sam, 952 A.2d 565 (Pa. 2008) (standard for appellate scope of review in PCRA appeals)
Commonwealth v. Pitts, 981 A.2d 875 (Pa. 2009) (mixed standard of review in PCRA matters)
Commonwealth v. Rollins, 738 A.2d 435 (Pa. 1999) (three-part ineffective-assistance test presuming counsel effective)
Commonwealth v. Travaglia, 661 A.2d 352 (Pa. 1995) (factors for proving ineffectiveness)
Commonwealth v. Barnes, 687 A.2d 1163 (Pa. 1997) (defendant bound by statements at plea colloquy)
Commonwealth v. Henkel, 90 A.3d 16 (Pa. Super. 2014) (deference to PCRA court credibility findings)
Commonwealth v. Washington, 927 A.2d 586 (Pa. 2007) (ineffectiveness in plea context and related standards)