People v. Williams, Docket No. 7743
| Decision Date | 31 March 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,Docket No. 7743,1 |
| Citation | 23 Mich.App. 129,178 N.W.2d 128 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Willie WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Carl Levin, Arthur J. Tarnow, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Div., Thomas P. Smith, Asst. Pros. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before LESINSKI, C.J., and QUINN and V. J. BRENNAN, JJ.
Defendant Willie Williams was convicted, following waiver of his right to jury trial, of breaking and entering a building in the nighttime (C.L.1948, § 750.110 (Stat.Ann.1962 Rev. § 28.305)) 1 and larceny from a building (M.C.L.A. § 750.360 (Stat.Ann.1954 Rev. § 28.592)). Following the denial of defendant's delayed motion for new trial, this Court granted defendant's application for delayed appeal. 2
The sole issue raised on appeal by defendant is whether several exhibits admitted at trial consisting of tools missing from the gas station of the complaining witness were obtained as a result of an illegal search and seizure, and whether their admission into evidence constituted reversible error.
Although defendant objected to the introduction of the exhibits at trial, no motion to suppress was made prior to trial. It has long been a well-established rule that the illegality of seizure of evidence, whether the facts constituting such illegality are known before trial, must first be raised by a motion to suppress in advance of trial. Defendant may not raise the issue at trial for the first time. People v. Heibel (1943), 305 Mich. 710, 9 N.E.2d 826; People v. Ferguson (1965), 376 Mich. 90, 135 N.W.2d 357; People v. Wilson (1967), 8 Mich.App. 651, 155 N.W.2d 210. A defendant with knowledge of facts constituting an alleged illegal search and seizure before trial has the responsibility of communicating same to his attorney who then has the responsibility of moving to suppress in advance of trial. People v. Ferguson; People v. Wilson. In the instant case defendant was clearly aware of all the facts surrounding his arrest and the search and seizure of the exhibits now complained of. As no motion to suppress was made prior to trial the issue of illegal search and seizure was waived.
Affirmed.
1 See currently: M.C.L.A. § 750.110 (Stat.Ann....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Moore
...were in the possession of the Commonwealth. The male defendant aided in the search and was present at the seizures. People v. Williams, 23 Mich.App. 129, 178 N.W.2d 128, leave to appeal den. 383 Mich. 792. He was personally informed that he was being arrested for assault and battery with a ......
-
People v. Mitchell
...Childers, 20 Mich.App. 639, 174 N.W.2d 565 (1969); People v. Paffhousen, 20 Mich.App. 346, 174 N.W.2d 69 (1969). People v. Williams #1, 23 Mich.App. 129, 178 N.W.2d 128 (1970). This rule is not without exception since the authorities permit the trial judge within his discretion to entertain......
-
People v. Hill, Docket No. 10183
...20 Mich.App. 639, 645, 174 N.W.2d 565; People v. Kennedy (1970), 22 Mich.App. 524, 527, 177 N.W.2d 669; People v. Williams #1 (1970), 23 Mich.App. 129, 130, 131, 178 N.W.2d 128; and People v. Rowls (1970), 28 Mich.App. 190, 196, 184 N.W.2d Defendant also contends that his palm prints and fi......
-
People v. Martin, Docket No. 9056
...v. Childers (1969), 20 Mich.App. 639, 174 N.W.2d 565; People v. Kennedy (1970), 22 Mich.App. 524, 177 N.W.2d 669; People v. Williams (1970), 23 Mich.App. 129, 178 N.W.2d 128. Where a defendant has knowledge of facts constituting an illegal search and seizure before trial, he has the respons......