People v. Jones, 140.
| Decision Date | 12 November 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 140.,140. |
| Citation | 263 N.W. 417,273 Mich. 430 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. JONES. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Willie Lee Jones was convicted of common-law rape, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
Appeal from Recorder's Court of Detroit; Arthur E. Gordon, judge.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Samuel H. Goldfine, of Detroit (Maurice D. Smilay, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellant.
Harry S. Toy, Atty. Gen., and Edmund E. Shepherd, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the People.
Plaintiff was convicted of common-law rape upon a woman, twenty-one years of age, and sentenced to a term of twenty to forty years in prison.
The people's claim is that about 1:30 o'clock in the morning of September 28, 1934, four men in an automobile accosted the complaining witness, dragged her into the car, took her by force to a room in an apartment hotel, defendant was in the room, and, while two of them, Louis Shermataro and Nate Simmons, held her, defendant criminally assaulted her, as did the others afterward.
Defendant's claim is that the complaining witness came voluntarily to his room between 1:30 and 2 o'clock with Nate Simmons, defendant and Shermataro then being in the room; the other men left for a few minutes, and, during their absence, defendant and complainant cohabited with her full consent.
Defendant contends the charge of the court generally was inadequate to protect his rights; and particularly contained reversible error in the following instruction:
The complaint is that the court did not charge upon the lesser offenses of assault with intent to commit the crime of rape and assault and battery, included in the major offense, although no request for such instruction was made by defendant. Upon request for such instruction, it would have been error to refuse it. 3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 17325. However: ‘The failure of the court to instruct on any point of law shall not be ground for setting aside the verdict of the jury unless such instruction is requested by the accused.’ 3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 17322.
The duty of a court to instruct upon the lesser offenses included in a charge of rape has been the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Henderson v. Bannan
...the jury on each of the three cognate offenses of rape, assault with intent to commit rape, and simple assault. People v. Jones, 1935, 273 Mich. 430, 263 N.W. 417. Noting these distinctions which the Michigan courts have made, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently made an obs......
-
People v. Mendoza
...Court's treatment of M.C.L. § 768.32, which permits an instruction on lesser offenses when supported by the evidence); People v. Jones, 273 Mich. 430, 263 N.W. 417 (1935) (holding that the court erred so as to require reversal when it affirmatively excluded a lesser offense from the jury's ......
-
People v. Bryant
...of the lesser charge. This had long been considered as error. People v. Lemmons, 384 Mich. 1, 178 N.W.2d 496 (1970); People v. Jones, 273 Mich. 430, 263 N.W. 417 (1935). Although People v. Henry, 395 Mich. 367, 370-374, 236 N.W.2d 489, 492-493 (1975), ambiguously 3 states "a repudiation of ......
-
People v. Wynn
...(p. 138, 184 N.W. p. 425). This rule was recognized, describing subsequent adopting cases, but distinguished, in People v. Jones, 273 Mich. 430, 263 N.W. 417 (1935). That case neatly described the rule: '. . . in the absence of a request to charge, the court does not err in failing to instr......