People v. Austin

190 N.W.2d 744, 34 Mich. App. 143

• Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
• Decided: February 24, 1972
• Docket: Docket 10599
• Status: Published

Opinion

Original Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant pled guilty to the charge of larceny in a building. 1 He asks this Court to vacate the plea of guilty and remand the case for new trial.

While the defense of intoxication or drug addiction is a defense to a specific intent crime, larceny in a building is not such a specific intent crime. Further the motion comes too late. People v. Miles (1970), 28 Mich App 562. The people have filed a motion to affirm pursuant to GCE 1963, 817.5(3).

A review of the briefs and records in this cause make it manifest that the question sought to be reviewed is so unsubstantial as to need no argument or formal submission.

Accordingly, the motion to affirm is granted.

Amended Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

Defendant pled guilty to the charge of larceny in a building, MOLA 750.360; MSA 28-.592. He asks this Court to vacate the plea of guilty and remand the case for new trial because prior to acceptance of the plea and prior to sentence, defendant indicated he was sick from drug addiction at the time of the offense. This attack on the validity of the plea is made for the first time on appeal. The people have moved to affirm, GCE 1963, 817.5 (3).

People v. Spencer, 23 Mich App 56 (1970), controls.

Motion to affirm is granted.

1 MCLA § 750.360 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.592).