People v. Shipp
| Decision Date | 24 May 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,Docket No. 8415,1 |
| Citation | 190 N.W.2d 750,34 Mich.App. 67 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry SHIPP, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
John F. Gilhool, Wyandotte, for defendant-appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Div., Angelo A. Pentolino, Asst. Pros. Atty., for plaintiff-Appellee.
Before LESINSKI, C.J., and LEVIN and O'HARA, * JJ.
The defendant, Larry Shipp, was charged with committing the offense of armed robbery, M.C.L.A. § 750.529 (Stat.Ann.1971 Cum.Supp. § 28.797) and was convicted by a jury of unarmed robbery, M.C.L.A. § 750.530 (Stat.Ann.1954 Rev. § 28.798).
On cross-examination the complaining witness was questioned regarding his identification of the defendant as the assailant:
The defendant contends that the jury may have inferred from the answer that he had a police record--otherwise, why would the police have had his picture? The jury may, indeed, have drawn that unfavorable inference but under the circumstances this does not entitle the defendant to a new trial.
The defendant's lawyer should not have been surprised when, in response to the question, 'Who had the pictures?' the witness responded, 'Police.' Since he chose to question the witness regarding the pretrial photographic identification in the presence of the jury and to ask the question which resulted in the foreseeable answer, 'police,' the defendant may not now properly be heard to complain.
The defendant also contends that the people failed to prove that he was, within the meaning of the relevant statute, 'armed with a dangerous weapon, or any article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the person so assaulted to reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon.' The testimony tended to show that the defendant put his hand under his coat and held it in such a way to lead the victim to believe that 'he probably had a gun.' This testimony presented an issue of fact for resolution by the trier of fact. See People v. Jury (1966), 3 Mich.App. 427, 142 N.W.2d 910, where we held on the evidence there presented that the trier of fact could properly find that the robber's hand and a covering over it had been so combined as to resemble a gun, so that the combination was an 'article (used or)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Krist
...had gestured with a covered hand in such a manner as to lead the victim to conclude that he probably had a weapon. People v. Shipp, 34 Mich.App. 67, 69, 190 N.W.2d 750 (1971); People v. Washington, 4 Mich.App. 453, 455-456, 145 N.W.2d 292 (1966); People v. Jury, 3 Mich.App. 427, 432, 142 N.......
-
People v. Abdalla
...he assisted in the introduction of this material into the trial. When this is done, he cannot complain of error. People v. Shipp, 34 Mich.App. 67, 69, 190 N.W.2d 750 (1971). We hold by virtue of these authorities that the evidence was for the jury and that any objection here went to the wei......
-
People v. Banks
...[an article] in a manner to lead the person so assaulted to reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon.' " People v. Shipp, 34 Mich.App. 67, 69, 190 N.W.2d 750 (1971), quoting People v. Jury, 3 Mich.App. 427, 429, 142 N.W.2d 910 (1966). Considering the record in its entirety, I am persu......
-
People v. Saenz, Docket No. 63565
..."any article" with which the assailant is armed. The Court of Appeals based its holding herein on the authority of People v. Shipp, 34 Mich.App. 67, 190 N.W.2d 750 (1971); and People v. Jury, 3 Mich.App. 427, 142 N.W.2d 910 (1966). The rule of these cases is that testimony that defendant us......