Whether a defendant with a learning disability can be accepted a guilty plea without proper allocation, assistance of counsel, and a thorough colloquy from the trial judge to ensure the defendant fully understands the consequences of the plea

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED. Din His ease, THe Sulty plea wes Not only IN Com PREHENSIVE , eat Coeete AND MADE “THRoVeH Duress Gy Pelyinley ON ered dyossl risirfORernPON By COWGEL, | UNould’ Hee “We cowEIS “To eevies [He MRKUMTTaAtcs Bekoee “He Quilty Pen Was imposed. Divo could & BeferDant Writ B eteepen UAse of leering DisaviliTy (L.0.) Gully tar pach “he ToT o& [He (oNSEQUEN UES oF A guilty ples WeTHout allocition , ate ASSISTaNce OF Counsel o@ A peopel Colloguy Peon & “orl juooe’ . ZI woutd ie “He touetd To ReNIEW ANY Known possibilities oF & UNINOVoN IND IVE Dual THOT Would Have Supporter He EVIDEN Le an SUamESTiON OF “He CommonweNnts Fnowes. i) Toinlly 5 EWE Courts wuld BE Sb Kind “fo Rees “Me factual Evidence (DNA Finigce pranets , FOTTPUNTS Ect) IN is ease “(et te) nesolvitely Not & mertey fo tHe pppricenrt. fo pgens couct “Did Not wNSDer How ABUADaNtly Gounsel errs Pelion! Ons BekorE and AFTER SENTENUNG,. THe Hervy DistEeeard of aay 8 ict Could Have Provided AN ATERNATIVE “auttorns, pue peotess uires Het THe DefenDant Fully UNORSTAYD “He Lull CON SEQUENCES of & wen ot Guilty agkore ct CAN 82 KceEETED. t employ the review o&€ “His case “Be wecosider “We PecohPeD pecs of A learning Oisacility By tHe HekendanTt Het A Korma eitunt rant coul® Not Be Suecesshi cabin presented a OECENPANT LOHd 1S etl ly slow [N CompeeHon sion. to , __