People v. Carlisle, Docket No. 5931

Citation19 Mich.App. 680,173 N.W.2d 240
Decision Date29 October 1969
Docket NumberNo. 1,Docket No. 5931,1
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Doreen CARLISLE, Defendant-Appellant
CourtCourt of Appeal of Michigan (US)

A. Allen Chalfin, Charles T. Burke, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.

Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing, William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Wayne County, Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, Wayne County, Luvenia D. Dockett, Asst. Pros. Atty., Wayne County, Detroit, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before LESINSKI, C.J., and FITZGERALD and T. J. BRENNAN, JJ.

FITZGERALD, Judge.

In 1965, when defendant-appellant was 22 years of age, she pled guilty to the offense of assault with intent to rob, being armed. 1 She was placed on probation, but she allegedly violated its terms and was sentenced to serve 2 to 20 years in prison. In 1968, she filed a motion to withdraw her plea of guilty alleging failure of the trial court to inquire into the underlying facts and circumstances of the charge before accepting her plea which was heard by the successor to the trial judge. The motion was denied on the grounds that GCR 1963, 785.3 was substantially complied with in that statements made by her to the investigating detective showed that she was informed of a plan to commit a robbery; that she was a 'lookout'; that she drove off with the money; and that she drove her accomplice, who was shot, to the hospital. In other words, the court considered this confession to provide a substantial basis for the acceptance of her plea.

The trial court exhaustively questioned the defendant as to her unequivocal desire to plead guilty. It did not pursue the apparent intention and willingness of the defendant to discuss the circumstances behind her plea. 2 The court did comply minimally with GCR 1963, 785.3(2), as to the plea being freely made, but did not meet the additional requirement that a defendant be carefully examined as to the nature of the accusation which must contain the elements of the crime charged. It is desirable that a defendant not plead guilty to a crime which she well may not have committed despite her willingness to believe to the contrary. People v. Perine (1967) 7 Mich.App. 292, 151 N.W.2d 876; People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich. 267, 99 N.W.2d 347.

The recent case of People v. Bartlett (1969), 17 Mich.App. 205, 169 N.W.2d 337, is support for this holding that a guilty plea is properly taken when the court carefully inquires into the facts. However, even where there are elements of the crime charged which are not apparent in those facts revealed by the defendant during this careful questioning, they may be properly provided by reference to the preliminary examination. So if the court, reviewing all available facts, is satisfied that if there were a trial, the defendant might well be convicted, then the acceptance of the plea was correct. Such a factual basis is essential.

At the preliminary examination here, a confession by the defendant was read into the record. The confession was given to a detective without counsel present after she had stated to the assistant prosecuting attorney, a few hours previously, that she did not wish to talk, and asked, 'If I want a lawyer what do I do?'

She now says she did not question the confession at the taking of the plea because evidence of the prior statement to the assistant prosecuting attorney was not in the court file and she could not know that the confession would be used to provide a factual basis for the unquestioned acceptance of her plea. The fact that the reviewing court which heard her motion to withdraw the plea apparently relied heavily on the confession in denying the motion prompts us to remand this case for a 'Walker hearing' (People v. Walker (On Rehearing 1965), 374 Mich. 331, 132 N.W.2d 87) to determine the legality of the obtaining of the confession upon which the tender and acceptence of the plea was based. People v. Daniels (1966), 2 Mich.App. 395, 140 N.W.2d 541.

The only other evidence offered at the preliminary examination was provided by a patrolman who testified that, based on a description and address of a girl who drove the wounded man to the hospital, he went to defendant's house. She there stated that she did drive the man to the hospital After he came to her house and asked her to do so.

If the Walker hearing reveals that the confession was involuntary and thus improperly taken at the preliminary examination, the trial court should further inquire into the facts of the case before again accepting this plea as was done in Daniels, supra. If the confession was proper, taken together with the testimony of the patrolman, then a sufficient factual basis appears to exist, despite the absence of the desirable examination of the defendant.

Remanded for a hearing on the voluntariness of the confession based on People v. Walker, Supra. If the confession is found to have been involuntarily made, then a new trial shall be had, otherwise the cause is affirmed.

V. J. BRENNAN, Judge (dissenting).

The defendant contends that her plea of guilty is invalid because 1) the trial court failed to inquire into her conduct before accepting her plea, as required by GCR 1963, 785.3, and 2) an allegedly invalid confession was used as an inducement to the plea. Neither of these claims, on the present record, supports a ruling that her plea is invalid.

As to the first claim, I cannot accept the majority's view that without some evidence on the record indicating the truth of the defendant's plea, the plea cannot stand. Although past decisions of both this Court and the Supreme Court adhere to this view,* the Supreme Court has recently held that noncompliance with the prophylactic standards of GCR 1963, 785.3 does not alone warrant the withdrawal of a plea. People v. Dunn (1968), 380 Mich. 693, 158 N.W.2d 404; People v. Stearns (1968), 380 Mich. 704, 158 N.W.2d 409; People v. Winegar (1968), 380 Mich. 719, 158 N.W.2d 395. Before the withdrawal of a plea is justified, it must appear that the procedural fault affected the outcome:

'(A convicted defendant) has the burden of showing something more than technical noncompliance with a rule. Absent a showing of violation or denial of constitutional rights, he has the obligation of alleging in a motion to withdraw his plea such facts as would, if true, substantiate a finding that there was noncompliance which resulted in a miscarriage of justice.' People v. Winegar, Supra, 733, 158 N.W.2d 402.

Without attempting to define...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • People v. Wade
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • 23 Junio 1970
    ...grounds for setting aside the plea of guilty. People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich. 267, 99 N.W.2d 347; People v. Carlisle (1969), 19 Mich.App. 680, 684, 173 N.W.2d 240; People v. Johnson (1966), 2 Mich.App. 182, 139 N.W.2d 137; People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich.App. 292, 151 N.W.2d 876; and Pe......
  • People v. Temple
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • 8 Mayo 1970
    ...the motion to withdraw the plea is affirmed. ADDENDUM People v. Daniels (1966), 2 Mich.App. 395, 140 N.W.2d 541; People v. Carlisle (1969), 19 Mich.App. 680, 173 N.W.2d 240; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Herman v. Claudy (1956), 350 U.S. 116, 76 S.Ct. 223, 100 L.Ed. 126; Smiley v. Wi......
  • People v. Carlisle
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • 6 Abril 1972
    ...Court on September 26, 1968. The Court of Appeals remanded this case to the trial court with instructions. People v. Carlisle, 19 Mich.App. 680, 173 N.W.2d 240 (1969). The Court of Appeals held that a factual basis is necessary for the acceptance of a guilty plea. The only evident factual b......
  • People v. Horvath, Docket No. 7861
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • 3 Agosto 1970
    ... ... Richardson (1970), 397 U.S. 759, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763. All contrary prior decisions of this Court are hereby superseded. 1 ...         The motion to affirm is granted ... --------------- ... 1 People v. Carlisle (1969), 19 Mich.App. 680, 173 N.W.2d 240; People v. Carlton (1966), 5 Mich.App. 20, ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT