People v. Dugger

165 N.W.2d 268, 14 Mich. App. 270, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 896
Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided November 26, 1968·No. Docket 4,747·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

*271 Per Curiam.

Defendant’s jury trial on a charge of breaking and entering a building with intent to commit larceny, CL 1918, § 750.110, as amended by PA 1961, No 133 (Stat Ann 1968 Cum Supp § 28.305), resulted in his conviction. He was sentenced and he appeals.

Defendant’s first assertion of error is that the required intent was not proved. A review of the record discloses facts and circumstances from which the intent could readily be inferred. This is sufficient. People v. Griffin (1889), 77 Mich 585.

Defendant next contends that the failure of the trial court to instruct on the lesser included offense of breaking and entering without permission was reversible error. No request for such an instruction was made, and no error is shown. People v. Thomas (1965), 1 Mich App 444.

Finally, defendant says he is entitled to a new trial because he did not have effective assistance from his appointed counsel. The record does not meet the test of Williams v. Beto (1965), 351 F2d 698, 704, for granting the requested relief on this basis.

Affirmed.

McGregor, P. J., and Quinn and Letts, JJ., concurred.

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

People v. Dugger, 165 N.W.2d 268, 14 Mich. App. 270, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 896 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968).

165 N.W.2d 268 (People v. Dugger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Chronister
205 N.W.2d 238 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1973)
People v. Abernathy
197 N.W.2d 106 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1972)
People v. Moore
189 N.W.2d 798 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1971)
People v. Cox
184 N.W.2d 486 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1970)
People v. Brown
174 N.W.2d 291 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1969)