People v. Cavitt

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Cavitt

471 N.W.2d 630, 189 Mich. App. 31

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 6, 1991

DocketDocket No. 124480

StatusPublished

This text of 471 N.W.2d 630 (People v. Cavitt) 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. Cavitt, 471 N.W.2d 630, 189 Mich. App. 31 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Michael J.

Kelly, J. Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon in a motor vehicle, MCL 750.227; MSA [32]*3228.424, and was sentenced to three to five years in prison. He appeals as of right.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel. We find no error requiring reversal. Defendant’s contention that defense counsel should have moved to suppress the evidence is unwarranted because the defendant was searched incident to his arrest for failing to produce his driver’s license. See People v Boykin, 31 Mich App 681; 188 NW2d 100 (1971). Furthermore, we decline to reverse on the basis of defense counsel’s failure to object to the holding of defendant’s preliminary examination thirteen days after his arraignment, People v Crawford, 429 Mich 151; 414 NW2d 360 (1987), finding the mistake not one but for which defendant would have had a reasonably likely chance of acquittal. Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668; 104 S Ct 2052; 80 L Ed 2d 674 (1984); People v Tommolino, 187 Mich App 14; 466 NW2d 315 (1991).

Affirmed.

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

Michael J.

Kelly, J. Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon in a motor vehicle, MCL 750.227; MSA [32]*3228.424, and was sentenced to three to five years in prison. He appeals as of right.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel. We find no error requiring reversal. Defendant’s contention that defense counsel should have moved to suppress the evidence is unwarranted because the defendant was searched incident to his arrest for failing to produce his driver’s license. See People v Boykin, 31 Mich App 681; 188 NW2d 100 (1971). Furthermore, we decline to reverse on the basis of defense counsel’s failure to object to the holding of defendant’s preliminary examination thirteen days after his arraignment, People v Crawford, 429 Mich 151; 414 NW2d 360 (1987), finding the mistake not one but for which defendant would have had a reasonably likely chance of acquittal. Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668; 104 S Ct 2052; 80 L Ed 2d 674 (1984); People v Tommolino, 187 Mich App 14; 466 NW2d 315 (1991).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

471 N.W.2d 630, 189 Mich. App. 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cavitt-michctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack