People v. Martin

• Decision Date: 24 July 1973
• Docket Number: No. 3,Docket No. 13720,3
• Citation: People v. Martin, 210 N.W.2d 461, 48 Mich.App. 437 (Mich. App. 1973)
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan

Page 461

210 N.W.2d 461

48 Mich.App. 437

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 13720.

Court of Appeals of Michigan, Division No. 3.

July 24, 1973.

Released for Publication Oct. 2, 1973.

Leave to Appeal Denied Nov. 29, 1973.

James R. Neuhard, State App. Defender, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.

Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Donald A. Burge, Pros. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before R. B. Burns, P.J., and Fitzgerald and O'Hara, ^* JJ.

R. B. BURNS, Presiding Judge.

Defendant pled nolo contendere to negligent homicide. M.C.L.A. § 750.325; M.S.A. § 28.557. He was sentenced to a term of from one to two years in prison. We affirm.

Defendant's counsel asked the trial court's permission to examine the presentence report filed by the probation officer, prior to sentencing. The court denied trial counsel's request but did allow appellate counsel to examine the report.

Defendant claims the trial court erred by considering certain information in the presentence report.

Defendant claims the trial judge erred by considering a prior Federal conviction. There is no showing on the record that the Federal conviction was infirm and it was not error for the judge to consider the prior conviction in sentencing the defendant.

Defendant also claims it was error for the trial judge to consider a presentence report which contained arrests which did not result in convictions. People v. Amos, 42 Mich.App. 629, 202 N.W.2d 486 (1972), held that a presentence report was required prior to sentencing. The probation officer is directed to inquire into the antecednets and character of the defendant.

The two incidents the defendants complains of were assaults by the defendant on his wife. The presentence report contained a summary of both incidents. Instead of a neighbor telling the probation officer of the assaults, the police record contained the information on the complaint of the wife. These assaults are as much a part of the defendant's antecedents and character as the ten letters written to the judge by the defendant's friends in his behalf. The trial judge is entitled to know the 'bitter' as well as the 'sweet' side of the defendant's character.

Defendant lastly complains that the presentence report contained the conclusion of the police chief that the accident which caused the death of defendant's wife was a deliberate act of the defendant. The statement was a conclusion of the police...