People v. Bencheck
Citation | 360 Mich. 430,104 N.W.2d 191 |
Decision Date | 11 July 1960 |
Docket Number | No. 59,59 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. Fred Carl BENCHECK, Defendant and Appellant. |
Court | Supreme Court of Michigan |
Leon A. S. Seidel and Richard C Fruit, Flint, for appellant.
Jerome F. O'Rourke, Pros. Atty. for Genesee County, Flint, for appellee.
Before the Entire Bench.
Defendant was charged with the offense of statutory rape before Genesee county circuit court. On January 14, 1959, the day set for trial, while represented by counsel he entered a plea of guilty. After full compliance with Court Rule No. 35-A and a careful examination in open court wherein defendant recited the facts pertaining to the offense in great detail and in substantial conformity to the charge as contained in the information, the circuit judge accepted the plea.
Subsequently, on February 18, 1959, defendant was brought to court for sentence and, after hearing the sentence administered to his older brother, sought to withdraw his own guilty plea, claiming that he had misunderstood his rights and that in fact he was innocent of the charge. After questioning of defendant in open court, wherein discrepancies in his new story appeared, and after hearing argument on the motion, the circuit judge denied it.
Obviously convinced of defendant's guilt, the court proceeded to sentence him. He said in this regard:
The court in this regard relied upon People v. Furkas, 255 Mich. 533, 238 N.W. 173. The authority of this case bas been considerably weakened, however, in subsequent cases. People v. Vasquez, 303 Mich. 340, 6 N.W.2d 538; People v. Machus, 321 Mich. 353, 32 N.W.2d 480.
Generally, it is considered that there is no absolute right to withdrawal of a guilty plea. People v. Case, 340 Mich. 526, 65 N.W.2d 803; People v. Banning, 329 Mich. 1, 44 N.W.2d 841. See, also, 14 Am.Jur., Criminal Law, § 286. But this Court's decisions suggest that the trial judge's discretion be exercised with great liberality when the motion is made prior to sentence or commencement of trial. People v. Piechowiak, 278 Mich. 550, 270 N.W. 783; People v. Stone, 293 Mich. 658, 292 N.W. 520; People v. Sheppard, 316 Mich. 665, 26 N.W.2d 557; People v. Anderson, 321 Mich. 533, 33 N.W.2d 72.
In People v. Banning, supra, 329 Mich. at page 7, 44 N.W.2d at page 844, this Court said:
1 ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Hollman, Docket No. 2663
...340, 342, 6 N.W.2d 538), have been overruled Sub silentio by such and other later decisions of our Supreme Court. In People v. Bencheck (1960), 360 Mich. 430, 104 N.W.2d 191, where the court (prior to the holding in Zaleski) said the trial judge's discretion to permit withdrawal of a guilty......
-
Shanks v. Wolfenbarger
...648, 655 (E.D.Mich.2001)(citing United States ex rel. Scott v. Mancusi, 429 F.2d 104, 109 (2nd Cir.1970); People v. Bencheck, 360 Mich. 430, 432, 104 N.W.2d 191 (1960); People v. Harris, 224 Mich.App. 130, 131, 568 N.W.2d 149 (1997)). Therefore, unless the pleas violated a clearly-establish......
-
Coddington v. Langley
...appellate counsel for failure to raise it on direct appeal. There is no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea. People v. Bencheck, 360 Mich. 430, 104 N.W.2d 191 (1960). However, a defense of innocence is asserted at the time of a request to withdraw the plea, and the request is not obvio......
-
State v. Dicks
...11 Cal.3d 793, 114 Cal.Rptr. 596, 523 P.2d 636 (1974); Commonwealth v. Santos, 450 Pa. 492, 301 A.2d 829 (1973); People v. Bencheck, 360 Mich. 430, 104 N.W.2d 191 (1960); see also People v. Riebe, 40 Ill.2d 565, 241 N.E.2d 313 ...