People v. Stirewalt
| Decision Date | 28 February 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,Docket No. 5676,2 |
| Citation | 167 N.W.2d 779,16 Mich.App. 343 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward Eugene STIREWALT, Defendant-Appellee |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
George L. Baer, Flint, for appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. General, Lansing, Robert F. Leonard, Pros. Atty., Genesee County, Donald A. Kuebler, Asst. Pros. Atty., Genesee County, Flint, for appellee.
Before FITZGERALD, P.J., and BRONSON and R. B. BURNS, JJ.
Edward Stirewalt was arrested on January 26, 1968, and charged with carrying a concealed weapon. 1 A preliminary examination was conducted in the municipal court for the city of Flint, and the defendant was bound over to Genesee county circuit court. On May 2, 1968, the court, ruling on defendant's motion to quash the information, dismissed the case on the ground that the weapon was not concealed. From this dismissal the prosecutor appeals. 2
All that the examining magistrate need find at the preliminary hearing is that an offense has been committed, and that there is probable cause that the accused committed it. 3 The examining magistrate does not sit as a trier of fact at the preliminary examination and he need not weigh the evidence to see if there is proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Spann (1966), 3 Mich.App. 444, 142 N.W.2d 887.
In People v. Morris (1967), 8 Mich.App. 688, 155 N.W.2d 270, and more recently in People v. Jones (1968), 12 Mich.App. 293, 162 N.W.2d 847, this Court has held that absolute invisibility in carrying a concealed weapon is not required. At the preliminary hearing it was determined that a weapon was in the defendant's pocket. There was no testimony that the gun was seen by anyone until the accused turned, at the insistence of a police officer.
A trial court has no right to substitute its judgment for that of the examining magistrate except in the case of a clear abuse of discretion, even though it may not agree with the determination. People v. Medley (1954), 339 Mich. 486, 64 N.W.2d 708; People v. Delaney (1962), 367 Mich. 694, 117 N.W.2d 176.
The issue of concealment depends on the facts of the case; and whether the weapon was concealed from 'ordinary observation' is a question to be determined by the trier of fact. People v. Jones, Supra. Upon a review of the transcript of the preliminary hearing, there appears to be sufficient evidence to uphold the magistrate's action.
Reversed, reinstated, and remanded.
1 C.L.1948, § 750.227 (Stat.Ann.1962 Rev. § 28.424).
2 Pursuant to C.L.1948, § 770.12 (Stat.Ann.1954 Rev. §...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Gaines
...unless an abuse of discretion is found. People v. Medley, 339 Mich. 486, 492--493, 64 N.W.2d 708, 712 (1954); People v. Stirewalt, 16 Mich.App. 343, 167 N.W.2d 779 (1969); People v. Brocato, 17 Mich.App. 277, 283, 169 N.W.2d 483, 485 (1969). 'It is not the function of the circuit court to s......
-
People v. Kincade, Docket No. 21040--1
...Absolute invisibility of a weapon is not indispensable to concealment; the weapon need not be totally concealed. People v. Stirewalt, 16 Mich.App. 343, 167 N.W.2d 779 (1969). See also People v. Jackson, 43 Mich.App. 569, 204 N.W.2d 367 (1972). The test for concealment in this jurisdiction w......
-
People v. Charron, Docket No. 16258
...up, there was a question of fact whether there was concealment within the meaning of the statute. See also, People v. Stirewalt, 16 Mich.App. 343, 167 N.W.2d 779 (1969); People v. Iacopelli, 30 Mich.App. 105, 186 N.W.2d 38 While there was sufficient evidence upon which the jury could find g......
-
People v. Clark, Docket No. 7454
...inside the picket. The pistol in defendant's pocket was a concealed weapon. People v. Jones, Supra. See, also, People v. Stirewalt (1969), 16 Mich.App. 343, 167 N.W.2d 779. The fact that the gun was unloaded is legally irrelevant. M.C.L.A. § 750.222 (Stat.Ann.1962 Rev. § 28.419), defines "P......