People v. Durham

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Durham

180 N.W.2d 290, 24 Mich. App. 358, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1721

Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided June 3, 1970·No. Docket No. 8,490·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

By his plea of guilty, defendant was convicted of attempted sale of a narcotic drug in violation of MCLA § 335.152 (Stat Arm 1957 Rev § 18.1122) and MCLA § 750.92 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.287). He appealed as of right. The people have filed a motion to affirm the conviction. GCR 1963, 817.5(3).

On appeal, defendant contends that the lower court failed to examine him sufficiently to establish the [359]*359crime and his participation therein. See People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich 267, 272 and People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich App 292.

Our review of the record satisfies us that the court’s examination of defendant was sufficient.

Motion to affirm is granted.

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

Per Curiam.

By his plea of guilty, defendant was convicted of attempted sale of a narcotic drug in violation of MCLA § 335.152 (Stat Arm 1957 Rev § 18.1122) and MCLA § 750.92 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.287). He appealed as of right. The people have filed a motion to affirm the conviction. GCR 1963, 817.5(3).

On appeal, defendant contends that the lower court failed to examine him sufficiently to establish the [359]*359crime and his participation therein. See People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich 267, 272 and People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich App 292.

Our review of the record satisfies us that the court’s examination of defendant was sufficient.

Motion to affirm is granted.

People v. Durham, 180 N.W.2d 290, 24 Mich. App. 358, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1721 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

180 N.W.2d 290 (People v. Durham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related