People v. Williams
| Decision Date | 27 October 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,Docket No. 5807,1 |
| Citation | 19 Mich.App. 544,172 N.W.2d 897 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Carl Levin, Detroit, Legal Aid and Defender Ass'n, for appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Lansing, Willaim L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Wayne County, Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, Wayne County, Luvenia D. Dockett, Asst. Pros. Atty., Wayne County, Detroit, for appellee.
Before LESINSKI, C.J., and H. J. GILLIS and DANHOF, JJ.
Defendant Charles Williams pleaded guilty to the charge of assault with intent to rob being armed (C.L. 1948, § 750.89 (Stat.Ann. 1962 Rev. § 28.284)). He was sentenced to a term of 25 to 35 years.
Defendant's contention that the trial court erred in considering defendant's juvenile record before imposing sentence is without merit. That the trial judge may consider additional factors in determining sentence is well settled. People v. Williams (1923), 225 Mich. 133, 195 N.W. 818; People v. Losinger (1951), 331 Mich. 490, 50 N.W.2d 137, 44 A.L.R.2d 1449; People v. Guillett (1955), 342 Mich. 1, 69 N.W.2d 140; People v. Camak (1967), 5 Mich.App. 655, 147 N.W.2d 746. A convicted defendant's juvenile record is a legitimate subject of inquiry, since it reflects upon defendant's 'antecedents, character and circumstances.' C.L. 1948, § 771.14 (Stat.Ann. 1954 Rev. § 28.1144). People v. Coleman (1969), 19 Mich.App. 250, 172 N.W.2d 512, released October 1, 1969). Moreover, the restriction on the subsequent use of juvenile dispositions contained in C.L. 1948, § 712A.23 (Stat.Ann. 1962 Rev. § 27.3178(598.23)) does not bar post-conviction examination of juvenile records for the purpose of sentencing. People v. Coleman, Supra. Nor was the failure of the trial judge to permit defendant to admit or deny the contents of the presentence report error. The record discloses no request by defendant or his counsel to examine the presentence report. People v. Camak, Supra.
Defendant also contends that the sentence imposed was illegal. The claim is made that the sentence is, in effect, harsher than a life sentence, since a life sentence might result in earlier parole. We find defendant's sentence was within the limits prescribed by C.L. 1948, § 750.89 (Stat.Ann.1962 Rev. § 28.284). We find no reversible error in the punishment imposed. See People v. Harwood (1938), 286 Mich. 96, 281 N.W. 551; People v. Connor (1957), 348 Mich. 456, 83 N.W.2d 315; People v. Krum (1965), 374 Mich. 356, 132 N.W.2d 69; People v. Mulier (1968), 12 Mich.App. 28, 162 N.W.2d 292.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Blocker
...Chase, 38 Mich.App. 417, 196 N.W.2d 824 (1972); People v. Overby, 42 Mich.App. 1, 201 N.W.2d 303 (1972).2 See also People v. Williams, 19 Mich.App. 544, 172 N.W.2d 897 (1969), leave den., 384 Mich. 753 (1970); People v. Matthews, 22 Mich.App. 619, 178 N.W.2d 94 (1970); People v. Davidson, 2......
-
People v. McFarlin
...appears to have unduly limited the prohibitions of M.C.L.A. § 712A.23; M.S.A. § 27.3178(598.23). In People v. Williams, 19 Mich.App. 544, 545--546, 172 N.W.2d 897 (1969), a Per curiam opinion in which this writer took part, we again upheld the used of a defendant's prior juvenile record at ......
-
People v. Meadows
...in a trial in which the party is a defendant. See People v. Coleman, 19 Mich.App. 250, 172 N.W.2d 512 (1969); People v. Williams, 19 Mich.App. 544, 172 N.W.2d 897 (1969). In the above mentioned cases the judges maintaining this reading of the statute held to allow a sentencing judge to enha......
-
People v. Malkowski
...People v. Camak (1967), 5 Mich.App. 655, 147 N.W.2d 746; People v. Beard (1969), 17 Mich.App. 409, 169 N.W.2d 509; People v. Williams (1969), 19 Mich.App. 544, 172 N.W.2d 897. Review of those reports is not of right, but within the sound discretion of the trial court. Defendant has not show......