People v. Weatherford, Docket No. 63260
| Decision Date | 15 December 1983 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 63260 |
| Citation | 341 N.W.2d 119,129 Mich.App. 359 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald Lynn WEATHERFORD, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Caruso, Sol. Gen., O. Paul Schendel, Pros. Atty., and Leonard J. Malinowski, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the People.
James R. Neuhard, State Appellate Defender by Stuart B. Lev, Asst. State Appellate Defender, for defendant-appellee.
Before WAHLS, P.J., and GRIBBS and WARSHAWSKY, * JJ.
Defendant was charged with delivery of marihuana, MCL 333.7401(1) and (2)(c); M.S.A. Sec. 14.15(7401)(1) and (2)(c). Defendant moved to dismiss the charges based on the defense of entrapment, and an evidentiary hearing was held pursuant to People v. Turner, 390 Mich. 7, 210 N.W.2d 336 (1973), and People v. D'Angelo, 401 Mich. 167, 257 N.W.2d 655 (1977). On March 3, 1982, the trial court entered an order dismissing the charges based on its finding of entrapment. The people appeal.
This Court will reverse a trial court's decision on the issue of entrapment only where the court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous or where the court made an erroneous application of the law. People v. D'Angelo, supra, 183, 257 N.W.2d 655; People v. LaBate, 122 Mich.App. 644, 332 N.W.2d 555 (1983).
We have examined the record and briefs and find no reversible error. The trial court properly applied the objective test of entrapment. People v. Turner, supra; People v. Killian, 117 Mich.App. 220, 323 N.W.2d 660 (1982), lv. den. 414 Mich. 944 (1982). The court's finding that the police and their agent impermissibly manufactured or instigated the crime is well supported by the hearing testimony and is not clearly erroneous. People v. White, 411 Mich. 366, 308 N.W.2d 128 (1981); People v. Killian, supra.
Finally, the trial court did not err in applying its findings on the entrapment issue to codefendant Henderson, since the charges against defendant and codefendant arose out of the same impermissible conduct on the part of the police and their agent.
Affirmed.
* Meyer Warshawsky, 36th Judicial Circuit Judge, sitting on Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Const. 1963, Art. 6, Sec. 23, as amended 1968.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Harding
...impermissible police conduct, it was proper for a trial court to apply its entrapment findings to both defendants. People v Weatherford, 129 Mich App 359; 341 NW2d 119 (1983), lv den 417 Mich 1100.33 The Court went on to note in Matthews that, while the police conduct was aimed at one defen......
-
People v. Brown
...grounds 411 Mich. 866, 306 N.W.2d 100 (1981); People v. Larcinese, 108 Mich.App. 511, 310 N.W.2d 49 (1981); People v. Weatherford, 129 Mich.App. 359, 361, 341 N.W.2d 119 (1983); People v. Crawford, 143 Mich.App. 348, 372 N.W.2d 550 (1985), lv. gtd. on other grounds 424 Mich. 879 (1986); Peo......
-
People v. Matthews
...police conduct, it was proper for a trial court to apply its entrapment findings to both defendants. People v. Weatherford, 129 Mich.App. 359, 341 N.W.2d 119 (1983), lv. den. 417 Mich. 1100.33 (1983). In the instant case, Saldana sought to find Zaiber's sources, who he ultimately concluded ......
-
People v. Crawford
...support a finding of entrapment unless it induced or instigated the crime at issue. Defendant's reliance on People v. Weatherford, 129 Mich.App. 359, 361, 341 N.W.2d 119 (1983), is misplaced. Weatherford contains merely an obscure statement that the trial court did not err by applying its f......