People v. Cline

Michigan Supreme Court

People v. Cline

181 N.W. 53, 213 Mich. 84, 1921 Mich. LEXIS 531

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 3, 1921

DocketDocket No. 120

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 181 N.W. 53 (People v. Cline) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Cline, 181 N.W. 53, 213 Mich. 84, 1921 Mich. LEXIS 531 (Mich. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Clark, J.

There were two counts in the information, the first charging statutory rape, the second the taking of indecent and improper liberties with the person of a female child without committing or intending to commit the crime of rape. Sections 15503, 15504, 3 Comp. Laws 1915. The child was 10 years of age, the defendant 30. The conviction was under the second count. It is urged that the court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a new trial because the verdict was against the great weight of the evidence and because of newly-discovered evidence. To discuss either of the questions the evidence must be reviewed. But no good will come of that. The offense, unfortunate to all concerned, is most revolting in its details. The case is well briefed and we have given it careful consideration. We think the motion was properly denied.

The conviction is affirmed.

Steere, C. J., and Moore, Fellows, Stone, Bird, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred. The late Justice Brooke took no part in this decision.

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

Clark, J.

There were two counts in the information, the first charging statutory rape, the second the taking of indecent and improper liberties with the person of a female child without committing or intending to commit the crime of rape. Sections 15503, 15504, 3 Comp. Laws 1915. The child was 10 years of age, the defendant 30. The conviction was under the second count. It is urged that the court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a new trial because the verdict was against the great weight of the evidence and because of newly-discovered evidence. To discuss either of the questions the evidence must be reviewed. But no good will come of that. The offense, unfortunate to all concerned, is most revolting in its details. The case is well briefed and we have given it careful consideration. We think the motion was properly denied.

The conviction is affirmed.

Steere, C. J., and Moore, Fellows, Stone, Bird, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred. The late Justice Brooke took no part in this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 N.W. 53, 213 Mich. 84, 1921 Mich. LEXIS 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cline-mich-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack