People v. Licavoli
| Decision Date | 08 December 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 207.,207. |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. LICAVOLI. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Recorder's Court of Detroit; John A. Boyne, Judge.
Pete Licavoli was convicted for murder, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Rodney Baxter, of Detroit, for appellant.
Paul W. Voorhies, Atty. Gen., and Harry S. Toy, Pros. Atty., Duncan C. McCrea and Edmund E. Shepherd, Asst. Pros. Attys., all of Detroit, for the People.
On the afternoon of July 14, 1930, Henry Typancey was sitting in his automobile parked on Field avenue, near Jefferson, in Detroit, when a man approached, shot and killed him. Defendant was charged with the murder, tried, convicted, and sentenced. He has appealed. 1. The complaint was made by a peace officer. After examination had been had and returned, and after the jury had been sworn, defendant for the first time sought to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint by showing that it, although made positively, was in fact made upon information and belief. The objection came too late. See People v. Hare, 57 Mich. 505, 24 N. W. 843;People v. Dowd, 44 Mich. 488, 7 N. W. 71.
2. Motion to quash on the ground that the examination showed no probable cause for charging defendant with the offense committed was made and properly denied. The evidence at the examination was that Typancey had been shot and killed, and there was testimony of an eyewitness that defendant did the shooting. Clearly, this is sufficient.
3. After the jury had been accepted by both sides but before final acceptance, as it later proved, certain pistols and cartridges (and other exhibits) to be used in the case were taken by officers from a package and placed on a table in the courtroom. Defendant moved for mistrial for this reason, and complains of denial of his motion. The pistols and cartridges were later received in evidence without objection, and therefore we see no prejudice in this incident.
4. The prosecuting attorney's opening statement, which was brief and in mere outline, was that defendant himself had done the shooting. There was some testimony that defendant was an accessory acting with another in committing the crime. There was also testimony of other witnesses that defendant himself did the shooting. The prosecuting attorney argued for conviction on either theory of the evidence, and the case was submitted on both theories. If defendant aided and abetted in committing this crime, he would nevertheless be a principal. Section 17253, Comp. Laws 1929; People v. Collins, 216 Mich. 541, 185 N. W. 850.
Defendant's complaint is not of the instructions of the court in this regard, but of the prosecuting attorney's departing from his opening statement. This would not be error, unless, perhaps, defendant was thereby misled to his prejudice. The testimony tending to characterize defendant as an accessory came in without objection, and, being in, could be used. Moreover, defendant offered no evidence in his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Bohm
...attorney and defendant pleads thereto, that he cannot thereafter object to either the complaint or the warrant. People v. Licavoli, 256 Mich. 229, 239 N.W. 292 (1931); United States ex rel. Penachio v. Kropp, 448 F.2d 110, 111 (C.A.6, 1971). III Defendant asserts that his sentence to prison......
-
People v. Hill
...and acquired jurisdiction of defendant's person by the filing of an information and an appearance by defendant. People v. Licavoli, 256 Mich. 229, 239 N.W. 292 (1931); United States ex rel. Penachio v. Kropp, 448 F.2d 110, 111 (C.A.6, 1971). 4 See also People v. Miller, 235 Mich. 340, 209 N......
-
People v. Lawson
... ... Id ... 6 See, People v. Chivas, 322 Mich. 384, 34 N.W.2d 22 (1948); People v. Pizzino, 313 Mich. 97, 20 N.W.2d 824 (1945); People v. Tutha, 276 Mich. 387, 267 N.W. 867 (1936); People v. Hill, 258 Mich. 79, 241 N.W. 873 (1932); People v. Licavoli, 256 Mich. 229, 239 N.W. 292 (1931); People v. Digione, 250 Mich. 206, 229 N.W. 421 (1930); People v. Kasem, 230 Mich. 278, 203 N.W. 135 (1925) ... The Court of Appeals has continued to approve such charges in People v. Wilder, 51 Mich.App. 280, 214 N.W.2d 749 (1974); People v. Grace, 50 Mich.App ... ...
-
People v. Spalla
...raising this objection. Consequently, if there was any defect in the complaint and warrant, it was thereby waived. People v. Licaboli, 256 Mich. 229, 231, 239 N.W. 292 (1931); People v. Dowd, 44 Mich. 488, 7 N.W. 71 (1880); People v. Bohm,49 Mich.App. 244, 250, 212 N.W.2d 61 (1973), Lv. den......