People v. Loggins, Docket No. 4537
Citation | 17 Mich.App. 388,169 N.W.2d 519 |
Decision Date | 27 May 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 1,Docket No. 4537,1 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John C. LOGGINS, Defendant-Appellant |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan (US) |
Alice Brantley Rucker, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing, William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, Wayne County, Detroit, for plaintiff-appellee.
Before R. B. BURNS, P.J., and FITZGERALD and HOLBROOK, JJ.
Defendant, after trial by jury, was convicted June 28, 1967, of felonious assault. C.L.1948, § 750.82 (Stat.Ann.1962 Rev. § 28.277). On appeal it is contended that the prosecution failed to indorse on the information certain alleged Res gestae witnesses. It is further contended that the defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel. The people have filed a motion to affirm the conviction.
An examination of the record fails to indicate that defense counsel presented a motion for the indorsement of any witnesses nor at any time objected to the prosecutor's failure to indorse the witnesses. Moreover, there is no indication that the prosecution knew the identity of the witnesses. The duty of the prosecution to indorse witnesses must necessarily be limited to witnesses whose identity is known. C.L.1948, § 767.40 (Stat.Ann.1954 Rev. § 28.980).
The contention that defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel is also without merit. People v. Rasmus (1967), 8 Mich.App. 239, 154 N.W.2d 590. It is manifest that the questions presented on appeal are unsubstantial and require no argument or formal submission.
The motion to affirm the defendant's conviction is granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Harrison, Docket No. 11447
...this Court has held that the prosecutor's duty under this statute is limited to witnesses whose identity is known. People v. Loggins, 17 Mich.App. 388, 169 N.W.2d 519 (1969). In the case at bar, the record affirmatively discloses that the prosecutor was fully apprised concerning these witne......
-
People v. Erb, Docket No. 15885
...... People v. Robinson, 30 Mich.App. 48, 49--50, 186 N.W.2d 53, 54--55 (1971). In People v. Loggins, 17 Mich.App. 388, 389, 169 N.W.2d 519, 520 (1969), it was stated:. 'An examination of the record fails to indicate that defense counsel presented a ......
-
People v. Simpson, Docket No. 16500
...However, citing People v. Todaro, 253 Mich. 367, 235 N.W. 185 (1931), aff'd, 256 Mich. 427, 240 N.W. 90 (1932), and People v. Loggins, 17 Mich.App. 388, 169 N.W.2d 519 (1969), the prosecutor claims that he was under no obligation to indorse and produce these witnesses because their identiti......
-
People v. Mack
...An unknown witness need not be produced by the people. People v. Harrell, 54 Mich.App. 554, 221 N.W.2d 411 (1974), People v. Loggins, 17 Mich.App. 388, 169 N.W.2d 519 (1969), People v. Todaro, 253 Mich. 367, 235 N.W. 185 (1931). In the case at bar, the unidentified customer did not even wit......