People v. Bradshaw

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Bradshaw

167 N.W.2d 841, 16 Mich. App. 348, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1390

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 28, 1969

DocketDocket No. 5,844

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 167 N.W.2d 841 (People v. Bradshaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Bradshaw, 167 N.W.2d 841, 16 Mich. App. 348, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1390 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant, convicted by a jury of breaking and entering, MCLA § 750.110 (Stat Ann [349]*3491968 Cum Supp § 28.305), contends that the trial judge committed reversible errors, both in the instructions on reasonable doubt and by denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, grounded on his contention that the evidence did not warrant a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Defendant did not object to the instructions, which fairly represented the issues and did not prejudice defendant. Therefore, the instructions are unassailable. People v. Petrosky (1938), 286 Mich 397; People v. Storrick (1924), 228 Mich 642; 2 Gillespie, Michigan Criminal Law & Procedure (2d ed), § 662.

Testimony included an identification of defendant at the crime scene. Thus the evidence, if believed, was sufficient for the jury to find defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Washington (1966), 4 Mich App 453.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI