Com. v. Callens, S. (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S24029-14 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. STEPHON A. CALLENS, Appellant No. 1712 WDA 2013 Appeal from the Order Entered October 8, 2013 In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County Criminal Division at No.: CP-07-CR-0000220-2013 BEFORE: BOWES, J., JENKINS, J., and FITZGERALD, J.* MEMORANDUM BY JENKINS, J. FILED JULY 03, 2014 Stephon Callens appeals from an order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea for aggravated assault. We affirm. Having examined the record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and the thorough and well-reasoned opinion of the Honorable Elizabeth Doyle of the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County, we conclude court erred in refusing to permit him to withdraw his guilty plea. Accordingly, we adopt her opinion as our own and affirm the order denying leave to withdraw on that basis. See Trial Court Opinion (finding that ____________________________________________ * Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court. J-S24029-14 Callens to withdraw his plea, since Callens had already litigated pretrial motions unsuccessfully through court-appointed counsel; demanded new counsel on date of jury selection on basis that he did not like counsel and did not want to select jury with him; became disruptive when court denied his continuance and was removed from courtroom; spoke with counsel and another attorney from the same office and filled out guilty plea colloquy form; stood mute when his attorney told the court that he was making intelligent and knowledgeable decision to plead guilty after discussing his situation with counsel; asserted to court that he wanted to plead guilty and accept plea offer in mitigated sentencing range; asserted to court that he understood the rights he was giving up and that he was not under influence of anything that would prevent him from understanding what was happening in the courtroom; and asserted to court that he was pleading guilty of his own free will, and that nobody was forcing him to plead guilty)1. Order affirmed. ____________________________________________ 1 We make one minor observation. On page 4 of the opinion, the trial court states that Callens claimed that the written answers to questions 33 and 35 opinion, the trial court wrote that Callens claimed at the hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea that the answers to questions 33 and 35 Callens claimed that his answers were inaccurate, and we construe the opinion accordingly. -2- J-S24029-14 Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 7/3/2014 -3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
