People v. Perine
| Decision Date | 10 July 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,Docket No. 2039,3 |
| Citation | 7 Mich.App. 292,151 N.W.2d 876 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Orlin Dale PERINE, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Stuart J. Dunnings, Jr., Lansing, Dunnings & Gibson, for appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing, Sidney Wizer, Pros. Atty., Otsego County, Gaylord, for appellee.
Before FITZGERALD, P.J., and T. G. KAVANAGH and QUINN, JJ.
March 30, 1964 defendant pleaded guilty to the offense of taking indecent liberties with a female under the age of 16 years contrary to the provisions of C.L.S.1961, § 750.336 (Stat.Ann.1954 Rev. § 28.568). April 24, 1964, he was sentenced to prison for a term of 9 to 10 years. On grant of his application for delayed appeal, he appeals and raises several questions, one of which is determinative of this appeal:
Did the trial judge commit error in failing to obtain from the defendant what acts in fact he had committed so as to constitute the crime to which he was entering a plea of guilty?
Defendant was arraigned in circuit court March 30, 1964 on an information charging him in Count I with statutory rape 1 and in Count II with taking indecent liberties with a female under the age of 16 years. 2 His attorney waived a reading of the information and stated his client desired to plead guilty to Count II. On recommendation of the prosecuting attorney, Count I was dismissed and defendant entered a plea of guilty to Count II. The record before us contains no examination of the accused by the trial judge with respect to the facts of the crime and defendant's participation in it.
This noncompliance with GCR 1963, 785.3(2) is fatal to the validity of the plea. Whether a defendant is represented by counsel or not such examination is required. People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich. 267, 99 N.W.2d 347.
While this holding obviates ruling on the other questions raised, for the benefit of the trial judge, the remand hereinafter ordered requires comment on the following question:
Is the sentence imposed by the trial judge void because the trial judge took into consideration other alleged similar offenses which were denied by the defendant to have been committed without proof that they had in fact been committed?
Even though this Court has held it has no supervisory control over the punishment imposed when that punishment is within the statutory maximum, as here, People v. Pate (1965), 2 Mich.App. 66, 138...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. McIntosh
...judge of alleged offenses which were denied by the defendant 'without proof that they had in fact been committed'. People v. Perine, 7 Mich.App. 292, 151 N.W.2d 876 (1967); Noland v. People, 175 Colo. 6, 485 P.2d 11i (1971), and Baker v. State, 3 Md.App. 251, 238 A.2d 561 (1968). In attempt......
-
People v. Williams
...of noncompliance with Barrows, the plea was accepted after the announcement of the Barrows decision; see, E.g., People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich.App. 292, 151 N.W.2d 876; People v. Johnson (1967), 8 Mich.App. 204, 154 N.W.2d 16; People v. Mason (1968), 13 Mich.App. 277, 164 N.W.2d 407. Cf. P......
-
People v. Wade
...Carlisle (1969), 19 Mich.App. 680, 684, 173 N.W.2d 240; People v. Johnson (1966), 2 Mich.App. 182, 139 N.W.2d 137; People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich.App. 292, 151 N.W.2d 876; and People v. Mason (1968), 13 Mich.App. 277, 164 N.W.2d 407. But see People v. Moore (1970), 21 Mich.App. 150, 175 N.......
-
People v. Coates, Docket No. 6160
...participation in its commission as required by People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich. 267, 99 N.W.2d 347, and People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich.App. 292, 151 N.W.2d 876. (2) That the defendant was denied his right to be represented by counsel at the time of his The record shows that an armed rob......