People v. Curley
| Decision Date | 06 March 1894 |
| Citation | 58 N.W. 68,99 Mich. 238 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. CURLEY. |
Error to recorder's court of Detroit; Fitz-William H. Chambers Judge.
William Curley, convicted of burglary, brings error Affirmed.
Joseph R. Nolan, for appellant.
Allan H. Frazer, Pros.Atty., and Ormond F. Hunt, Asst. Pros.Atty., for the People.
Respondent was convicted in the recorder's court of Detroit of the crime of breaking and entering the dwelling house of Julius Weil, in the city of Detroit, in the nighttime.On this appeal it is insisted that the prosecution failed to prove that the offense was committed in the county of Wayne.The objection is frivolous.The testimony showed that the house broken into was situated at 50 1/2 Jones street, in the city of Detroit.The court in which the conviction was had sat in the city of Detroit, and was styled the "Recorder's Court of the City of Detroit," and can take judicial notice that the city is within the county of Wayne.
2.It is also objected that it does not appear that the house was closed up before the breaking.Joseph Weil, the son of the owner of the house, testified that he returned at half-past 10; that the house was not open at that time; that the side door was closed,-he closed it himself, and bolted it.He was asked about a certain window that was found open at the time the burglary was committed,-as to whether that was closed,-and stated that it was closed; that he knew, because he went through the house.Mr. Julius Weil, the owner of the premises, returned, and found the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
People v. Morrow
...record which supports a conclusion that negates every reasonable theory consistent with defendant's innocence of the crime charged. People v. Johnson (1966), 4 Mich.App. 205, 144 N.W.2d 646. We have reviewed
People v. Curley (1894), 99 Mich. 238, 58 N.W. 68, People v. Boyce (1946), 314 Mich. 608, 23 N.W.2d 99, and People v. Lambo (1967), 8 Mich.App. 320, 154 N.W.2d 583, cases which arguably support defendant's conviction as charged. In each, however, the... -
People v. Wilson
...delicti of the crime of breaking and entering with intent to commit larceny is established by the unexplained presence of the defendant in the building at 3:00 a.m. with the window screen and window broken.
People v. Curley (1894), 99 Mich. 238, 58 N.W. 68; People v. Boyce (1946), 314 Mich. 608, 23 N.W.2d 99; People v. Lambo (1967), 8 Mich.App. 320, 154 N.W.2d 583. See People v. Morrow (1970), 21 Mich.App. 603, 175 N.W.2d 523. There is an ample basis for drawing... -
People v. Boyce
...established the corpus delicti and the identity of defendant as the guilty person. This was a compliance with the rule requiring proof of corpus delicti before testimony of confessions shall be received. See
People v. Curley, 99 Mich. 238, 58 N.W. 68, and People v. Trine, 164 Mich. 1, 129 N.W. 3. Defendant claims further that the testimony of confessions should have been stricken out because the confessions were obtained by coercion. We find no reversible error... -
People v. Palmer
...whether the same rule should be applied were the prosecutor to charge a defendant with an Attempt to break and enter with intent to commit a 'felony.'7 See
People v. Curley, 99 Mich. 238, 58 N.W. 68 (1894); People v. Boyce, 314 Mich. 608, 23 N.W.2d 99 (1946); People v. Butler, 27 Mich.App. 404, 183 N.W.2d 595 (1970); People v. Hughes, 27 Mich.App. 221, 183 N.W.2d 383 (1970).8 See People v. Johnson, 4 Mich.App. 205, 144 N.W.2d 646 (1966);...