People v. Jackson
| Decision Date | 24 June 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,Docket No. 5631,2 |
| Citation | 170 N.W.2d 259,17 Mich.App. 675 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leon JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
Appeal and Error -- Issues First Raised on Appeal.
The Court of Appeals will not entertain issues raised for the first time on appeal unless a clear inJustice is demonstrated (GCR 1963, 516.2).
Appeal from Genesee, Elza H. Papp, J.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Robert F. Leonard, Prosecuting Attorney, and Donald A. Kuebler, Chief Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Robert L. Segar, for defendant on appeal.
Leon Jackson was convicted of breaking and entering a store. Defendant appeals.
Before LESINSKI, C.J., and DANHOF and QUINN, JJ.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of breaking and entering a store on April 25, 1967, contrary to M.C.L.A. § 750.110 (Stat.Ann. 1968 Cum.Supp. § 28.305), and thereafter was sentenced to 6 1/2 to 10 years in prison.
At the trial, defendant conceded the breaking and entering, but presented the defense that he was too intoxicated to form the specific intent to commit a larceny or felony which was a necessary element of the statutory crime charged.
On appeal, defendant raises two issues. The first is did the trial court erroneously instruct the jury on the issue of intoxication as a defense? The other is did the remarks by the prosecution in closing argument constitute reversible error? No objection was made at the time of trial to either the court's instruction, or the remarks made by the prosecutor. This Court will not entertain issues raised for the first time on appeal unless a clear injustice is demonstrated. GCR 1963, 516.2, People v. Omell (1968), 15 Mich.App. 154, 166 N.W.2d 279; People v. Keiswetter (1967), 7 Mich.App. 334, 151 N.W.2d 829; People v. Dexter (1967), 6 Mich.App. 247, 148 N.W.2d 915; People v. Willis (1965), 1 Mich.App. 428, 136 N.W.2d 723. The record herein does not demonstrate that there has been a miscarriage of justice.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. McIntosh, Docket No. 8515
...(1967), 387 U.S. 294, 87 S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782.7 People v. Bynum (1970), 21 Mich.App. 596, 175 N.W.2d 870.8 People v. Jackson (1969), 17 Mich.App. 675, 170 N.W.2d 259.9 M.C.L.A. § 769.26 (Stat.Ann.1954 Rev. § 28.1096).1 In Barber v. Page the United States Supreme Court held that the ab......
-
People v. Sterbins
...record reveals that this issue was first presented at the appeal level and, therefore, is not properly before us. People v. Jackson (1969), 17 Mich.App. 675, 170 N.W.2d 259; People v. Smith (1969), 20 Mich.App. 243, 174 N.W.2d 22. So that there will be no confusion, however, we briefly poin......
-
People v. Bearden, Docket No. 7108
...cannot now be heard for the first time. GCR 1963, 516.2; People v. Smith (1969), 20 Mich.App. 243, 174 N.W.2d 22; People v. Jackson (1969), 17 Mich.App. 675, 170 N.W.2d 259; People v. Omell (1968), 15 Mich.App. 154, 166 N.W.2d The prosecutor, on re-direct, asked his only witness, a juvenile......
-
People v. Smith
...issue. Therefore, while refusal to read material testimony may be error, in this case it is not. This Court, in People v. Jackson (1969), 17 Mich.App. 675, 170 N.W.2d 259, stated that it would not entertain issues raised for the first time on appeal, unless a clear injustice is demonstrated......