People v. Schram, Docket No. 7167
Decision Date | 30 March 1970 |
Docket Number | No. 1,Docket No. 7167,1 |
Citation | 178 N.W.2d 93,23 Mich.App. 91 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael SCHRAM, Defendant-Appellant |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Carl Levin, Arthur J. Tarnow, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Div., Arthur N. Bishop, Asst. Pros. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before QUINN, P.J., and R. B. BURNS and FITZGERALD, JJ.
Convicted by jury verdict and sentenced for armed robbery, M.C.L.A. § 750.529 (Stat.Ann.1969 Cum.Supp. § 28.797), defendant appeals. He asserts two grounds of alleged reversible error, namely: improper admission of identification testimony and erroneous instruction.
No objection was made below either to the admission of the identification testimony or the instruction. These errors may not be raised for the first time on appeal and this Court will not consider them except to avoid clear injustice. People v. Ivy (1968), 11 Mich.App. 427, 161 N.W.2d 403. This record demonstrates no injustice.
Two additional reasons dictate affirmance, however. Assuming arguendo that it was error to admit the identification testimony, it was not reversible error in view of identification by three other witnesses.
During its instructions, the trial court said, 'I do not think there is any serious dispute that a crime in fact was committed.' However, the question of whether a crime was committed was left to the jury for its determination. On this record, the court's statement was legitimate comment. People v. Pratt (1930), 251 Mich. 243, 247, 231 N.W. 564.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Carter, Gen. Nos. 54117
...be waived. People v. Orr, 10 Ill.2d 95, 100, 139 N.E.2d 212; Hayes v. State, 46 Wis.2d 93, 175 N.W.2d 625 (1970); People v. Schram, 23 Mich.App. 91, 178 N.W.2d 93 (1970); and compare People v. Smith, 44 Ill.2d 82, 87, 254 N.E.2d 492. Judgment is In the instant case defendant made no objecti......
-
People v. Duerson, Docket No. 9672
...We perceive no prejudice. Error may not be raised for the first time on appeal, unless to avoid a clear injustice. People v. Schram (1970), 23 Mich.App. 91, 178 N.W.2d 93. This record reveals no suggestion of Defendant next questions the sufficiency of this charge to the jury upon reasonabl......
-
People v. Harper
...v. Council, 36 Mich.App. 682, 194 N.W.2d 34 (1971); People v. Grenier, 34 Mich.App. 93, 190 N.W.2d 742 (1971); People v. Schram, 23 Mich.App. 91, 178 N.W.2d 93 (1970), leave den. 384 Mich. 833 (1971). Here, there was no objection to the victim's in-court identification of the defendant. The......
-
People v. Martin, Docket No. 9056
...them for the first time on appeal, and the Court of Appeals will not consider them except to avoid clear injustice. People v. Schram (1970), 23 Mich.App. 91, 178 N.W.2d 93. The jury is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses in a criminal case. People v. Gray (1970), 23 Mich.App.......