People v. Bonneau, 12.

• Citation: 323 Mich. 237,35 N.W.2d 161
• Decision Date: 17 December 1948
• Docket Number: No. 12.,12.
• Parties: PEOPLE v. BONNEAU.
• Court: Supreme Court of Michigan

323 Mich. 237

35 N.W.2d 161

PEOPLE

v.BONNEAU.

No. 12.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Dec. 17, 1948.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE Appeal from Circuit Court, Houghton County; Leo J. Brennan, judge.

Irving Bonneau was convicted of having taken indecent liberties with person of a seven year old girl, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Before the Entire Bench.

Louis A. Keary, of Hancock, for appellant.

Eugene F. Black, Atty. Gen., and Stephen D. Condon, Pros. Atty., for Houghton County, of Hancock, for the People.

DETHMERS, Justice.

Defendant, a 29 year old man, convicted of having taken indecent liberties with the person of a seven year old girl, appeals.

Defendant assigns as error the court's denial of his motion, made after the jury was sworn, to quash the information. The motion came too late and was properly denied. Comp.Laws 1929, § 17290, Stat.Ann. § 28.1016. Lambert v. People, 29 Mich. 71;People v. Brott, 163 Mich. 150, 128 N.W. 236;People v. Curran, 191 Mich. 583, 158 N.W. 212;People v. Nappo, 251 Mich. 89, 231 N.W. 130.

The little girl walked from her home to a bus station where she was to take a bus to a neighboring town to visit her grandparents. At the station defendant indicated his willingness to take her there and she was seen by her sister to enter his automobile. She did not arrive at the home of her grandparents until about 2 1/2 hours later. Meanwhile, the mother and grandparents became alarmed, made a search for her and called the sheriff's office. When she finally arrived her face was flushed and swollen, her hair was all mussed up, she was nervous and excited, appeared to be frightened and refused to eat supper or candy when offered. She had 15 cents which she said defendant had given her. She was questioned but disclosed nothing about the offense. The mother testified that she questioned the girl intermittently for the next day or two without success; that on the third day another daughter stated that the little girl had told her what had happened; that the mother then questioned the girl further and that the latter then informed her of what defendant had done. The mother was permitted to testify as to the details of that conversation. The girl testified fully concerning defendant's commission of the offense; that she had not told her mother of the occurrence before because she was ‘scared’; that defendant had told her not to tell anybody. The mother testified that the girl had told her that the defendant had threatened that if she told anybody he would get after her again and that she was afraid because of defendant's threats to her. Defendant admitted having the girl in his car, but denied commission of the offense.

Testimony concerning the girl's appearance and condition shortly after the alleged attack was admissible. Strang v. People, 24 Mich. 1;People v. Hicks, 98 Mich. 86, 56 N.W. 1102.

Did the court err in permitting the mother to testify not only that the little girl had related the fact of the attack to her but also as to the details of the girl's statement to her?

Defendant relies on People v. Hicks, supra; People v. White, 194 Mich. 172, 160 N.W. 452;People v. Place, 226 Mich. 212, 197 N.W. 513;People v. Rock, 283 Mich. 171, 277 N.W. 873, 874. In the Hicks Case this court held the detailing of the conversation between the prosecutrix and a witness permissible, not as part of the resgestae but only as corroboration of prosecutrix's testimony, and that, therefore, the detailing thereof in that case was improper because it went beyond the testimony of the prosecutrix. In the White Case it was held that the statements of the complaining witness were made too long after the event and were, therefore, not admissible as part of the res gestae but only in corroboration of her testimony and, hence, the fact of her complaint, but not the details thereof, was admissible. In the Place Case details given by the prosecutrix to a police officer six weeks after the event were held inadmissible because they did not constitute a voluntary complaint made within a reasonable time. In the Rock Case it was held that testimony concerning the complaint of a 21 year old woman, made...