People v. Nicolaides, Docket No. 85869
Decision Date | 04 April 1986 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 85869 |
Citation | 383 N.W.2d 620,148 Mich.App. 100 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Deano NICOLAIDES, Defendant-Appellee. 148 Mich.App. 100, 383 N.W.2d 620 |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
[148 MICHAPP 100] Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Caruso, Sol. Gen., L. Brooks Patterson, Pros. Atty., Robert C. Williams, Chief Appellate Counsel, and Graham K. Crabtree, Asst. Pros. Atty., for the People.
[148 MICHAPP 101] S. James Clarkson, Southfield, for defendant-appellee.
Before MAHER, P.J., and J.H. GILLIS and WAHLS, JJ.
On motion for rehearing of this Court's order of September 27, 1985, peremptorily reversing a decision of the trial court on the prosecutor's application for leave to appeal pursuant to MCR 7.205(D)(2), the parties being in agreement that the issue is one which frequently arises in the criminal trial courts of this state, we have elected to resolve this matter through issuance of this per curiam opinion. Manuel v. Dep't of Corrections, 140 Mich.App. 356, 357, 364 N.W.2d 334 (1985).
In an original complaint filed by the Oakland County Prosecuting Attorney in 48th District Court, defendant was charged with operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor, in violation of Sec. 625(1) of the Michigan Vehicle Code, M.C.L. Sec. 257.625(1); M.S.A. Sec. 9.2325(1) and with operating a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol content of .10% or higher, in violation of Sec. 625(2) of the Michigan Vehicle Code, M.C.L. Sec. 257.625(2); M.S.A. Sec. 9.2325(2).
While the offenses are defined in separate subparagraphs of Sec. 625 of the Michigan Vehicle Code, the results of a conviction under either subparagraph are indistinguishable in terms of the range of sentencing alternatives and restrictions on driving privileges.
The district court granted defendant's motion to require the prosecutor to elect between the counts, i.e., to proceed on either one count or the other exclusively. The Oakland County Circuit Court denied the prosecutor's interlocutory application for leave to appeal, following which the prosecutor [148 MICHAPP 102] filed the present application for leave to appeal in this Court.
As a general rule, distinct criminal charges which do not arise out of the same transaction cannot be concatenated in one information or other charging document. Correlatively, it is generally permissible to charge in a single information all offenses which do arise out of a single criminal transaction or occurrence.
Prosecutorial elections between counts which arise from the same transaction but charge different offenses may not be required:
[148 MICHAPP 103] People v. Grabiec, 210 Mich. 559, 562-563, 178 N.W. 55 (1920).
Ordinarily, a defendant's rights can be protected by limiting the prosecution to one final conviction. See, e.g., People v. Wilder, 411 Mich. 328, 308 N.W.2d 112 (1981). In such situations, as long as there is evidence on each of several alternative theories, the prosecution need make no election until after the jury returns its verdict. People v. Bufkin (On Rehearing), 48 Mich.App. 290, 293, 210 N.W.2d 390 (1973), aff'd 395 Mich. 434, 236 N.W.2d 500 (1975).
In the present case, the prosecutor has filed a two-count complaint. This is improper, since only one statute is involved.
What the prosecutor may do, however, in the context of a single-count complaint, is to list alternative theories. Thus, in People v. Willie Johnson, 406 Mich. 320, 331, 279 N.W.2d 534 (1979), the Court held:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Matuszak, Docket No. 244817.
...using alternative theories...." People v. Goold, 241 Mich.App. 333, 342-343, 615 N.W.2d 794 (2000), citing People v. Nicolaides, 148 Mich.App. 100, 102-103, 383 N.W.2d 620 (1985). Defendant first asserts that because he was convicted of CSC III before his trial on CSC I, by virtue of his pl......
-
People v. Herndon
...in a single information all offenses which do arise out of a single criminal transaction or occurrence," People v. Nicolaides, 148 Mich.App. 100, 102, 383 N.W.2d 620 (1985).38 The parties also agree that the prosecutor was free to use alternative statutory theories to support a single murde......
-
People v. Bigelow
...to prove the same crime, the prosecutor may list the alternative theories to prove a single-count complaint. People v. Nicolaides, 148 Mich.App. 100, 383 N.W.2d 620 (1985). In Nicolaides, this Court held that although it is improper for the prosecutor to charge a defendant with two differen......
-
People v. Czuprynski
...plain error affecting substantial rights. People v. Danto , 294 Mich. App. 596, 605, 822 N.W.2d 600 (2011).In People v. Nicolaides , 148 Mich. App. 100, 101, 383 N.W.2d 620 (1985), the prosecutor charged the defendant, under the version of MCL 257.625 then in effect, with two counts: (1) op......