People v. Vasquez

• Citation: 6 N.W.2d 538,303 Mich. 340
• Decision Date: 24 November 1942
• Docket Number: No. 101.,101.
• Parties: PEOPLE v. VASQUEZ.
• Court: Supreme Court of Michigan

303 Mich. 340

6 N.W.2d 538

PEOPLE

v.VASQUEZ.

No. 101.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Nov. 24, 1942.

Vivien Vasquez was convicted on her plea of guilty of falsely and feloniously forging an order for the payment of money with intent to injure and defraud, and she appeals.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Midland County; Ray Hart, Judge.

Before the Entire Bench.

Walter B. Brown, Pros. Atty., of Midland, and Edmund E. Shepherd, Sol. Gen., of Lansing, for plaintiff and appellee.

Riley L. Crane, of Saginaw, for defendant and appellant.

SHARPE, Justice.

Defendant, Vivien Vasquez, was charged and sentenced for falsely and feloniously forging an order for the payment of money with intent to injure and defraud. She waived examination before a justice of the peace and was brought before the circuit court of Midland county on January 2, 1941, where without counsel she pleaded guilty to the charge laid in the information. At that time, the trial court questioned defendant as to whether she understood the charge against her and explained the pleas she could make. He then interviewed defendant privately in his chambers.

In open court the trial court said: ‘Mrs. Vasquez having plead guilty to the charge made against her in this Court, after talking with her privately the Court is satisfied she plead guilty of her own free will and without any inducement used to prevail upon her to plead guilty. The Court will accept her plea and the matter will be referred to the Bureau of Probation, Mr. Nicholson, for report upon the matter.’

Defendant was brought before the court on January 14, 1941, and questioned at length as to her part in the crime that had been committed.

After sentence and on January 22, 1941, a motion to withdraw the plea, vacate the sentence, and for a new trial was filed on the ground that defendant was not guilty of the charge; that she did not have a preliminary examination; that she did not understand her legal rights; and that the sentence imposed was excessive. An affidavit was filed in support of the motion by defendant in which she said: ‘When I was arrested by Sheriff Smith of Midland he told me the best thing for me to do was to waive examination and plead guilty and I did so on his advice as he told me my punishment would be placed on probation and not anything more.’

The prosecutor filed an answer supported by affidavit in opposition to the motion. The motion was heard by the trial court on February 8, 1941; the testimony of the sheriff, who denied that he had made any promises to the defendant, was taken; and the trial court denied defendant's motion. Defendant appeals.

We are committed to the doctrine that a defendant may withdraw his plea of guilty at any time before sentence has been imposed. People v. Piechowiak, 278 Mich. 550, 270 N.W. 783;People v. Wexner, 280 Mich. 696, 274 N.W. 371;People v. Stone, 293 Mich. 658, 292 N.W. 520. But we have always adhered to the rule that after sentence has been imposed, the withdrawal of a plea of guilty rests in the sound discretion of the court. People v. Williams, 225 Mich. 133, 195 N.W. 818;People v. Kobrzycki, 242 Mich. 44, 217 N.W. 782;People v. Skropski, 292 Mich. 461, 290 N.W. 869.

We think the...