People v. Eagan

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Eagan

208 N.W.2d 219, 46 Mich. App. 377, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 1211

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 24, 1973

DocketDocket 12991

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 208 N.W.2d 219 (People v. Eagan) 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. Eagan, 208 N.W.2d 219, 46 Mich. App. 377, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 1211 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Lesinski, C. J.

Defendant appeals his plea-based conviction of breaking and entering, MCLA 750.110; MSA 28.305. In accepting the plea the trial judge informed the defendant, a 17-year-old, that if he did not plead guilty he would have the right to a trial; however, the trial judge failed to inform the defendant that he had a right to a trial by jury or by the court without a jury. This was error. People v Jaworski, 387 Mich 21 (1972).

It cannot be said that defendants in criminal trials could be presumed to know of a right to trial by jury or by the court without a jury. A knowing, understanding, and voluntary waiver requires the right to be unequivocally explained. Where it is not done, the law presumes no waiver from a silent record. Boykin v Alabama, 395 US 238; 89 S Ct 1709; 23 L Ed 2d 274 (1969).

That the right to trial and right to trial by jury are substantially different, no one could argue. See Duncan v Louisiana, 391 US 145; 88 S Ct 1444; 20 L Ed 2d 491 (1968). This is precisely the reason we reverse.

Reversed and remanded.

All concurred.

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