COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Annunziata and 

 Bumgardner 

Argued at Alexandria, Virginia 

OLUDARE OGUNDE, A/K/A TONY WILLIAMS, 

 S/K/A OLIDARE OGUNDE 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 0439-97-4 JUDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER, III 

 MAY 12, 1998 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY 

Leslie M. Alden, Judge 

 Michael F. Devine for appellant. 

 John H. McLees, Jr., Assistant Attorney 

General (Richard Cullen, Attorney General; 

Thomas D. Bagwell, Senior Assistant Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 Oludare Ogunde was charged with four felonies: credit card 

theft, credit card forgery, credit card fraud, and forgery of a 

public record. During his trial, the appellant moved to proceed 

pro se; his motion was granted. Upon his plea of guilty, 

appellant was convicted as charged. He appeals his conviction 

arguing that he did not waive his right to an attorney knowingly 

and intelligently. He contends that the trial court did not 

inform him of the risks of proceeding pro se. Because we find 

the appellant voluntarily and intelligently pleaded guilty, we 

hold that he waived any objection to the trial court's earlier 

decision permitting him to act as his own attorney. Accordingly, 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

we affirm. 

 The appellant retained counsel to represent him. After the 

jury had been selected, opening arguments made, and three 

witnesses for the Commonwealth had testified, the appellant moved 

to proceed pro se. 

 The court admonished the appellant that his questioning 

would have to comport with appropriate procedures. She 

acknowledged that the appellant had the right to represent 

himself and granted his motion. She also appointed his former 

attorney as standby counsel to assist as requested by the 

appellant. The attorney remained throughout the trial and 

consulted with the appellant several times. 

 After both sides had rested while they were discussing the 

instructions, the appellant stated that he wanted to enter a plea 

of guilty. He consulted with his attorney, reviewed and signed 

written waiver forms, and repeated his desire to change his plea. 

 The court then conducted a full inquiry pursuant to Rule 3A:8 

and Form 6. Throughout the dialogue, the appellant consulted 

with his attorney. He specifically acknowledged that he waived 

his right to appeal from any sentence that would be imposed. The 

court found that the plea was voluntary and intelligently made 

and made with an understanding of the nature of the charges and 

the consequences of the plea. The judge accepted the plea. 

 A voluntary plea of guilty is a self-supplied conviction 

that waives all defenses other than those jurisdictional. See

Savino v. Commonwealth, 239 Va. 534, 538, 391 S.E.2d 276, 278-79, 
- 3 - 

cert. denied, 498 U.S. 882 (1990). In this case, the trial 

court's finding that the plea was voluntary and intelligent is 

well supported by the record. Accordingly, we affirm the 

convictions.1

 Affirmed.

 

 1In light of our decision in this case on other grounds, we 

need not reach the issue of whether appellant knowingly and 

intelligently waived the right to counsel while being aware of 

the dangers and disadvantages of representing himself. See

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975).