People v. Eineder

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Eineder

16 Mich. App. 270

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 27, 1969

DocketDocket No. 5,452

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 16 Mich. App. 270 (People v. Eineder) 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. Eineder, 16 Mich. App. 270 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant contends his jury conviction for taking possession and driving away a motor vehicle, under CL 1948, § 750.413 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.645), denied him equal protection of the law. He argues that two statutes of unequal penalties apply to the same crime, the other statute being CL 1948, § 750.414 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28-.646). Thus, defendant contends he was subject to the arbitrary choice of the prosecutor as to which statute to apply.

[271]*271In People v. Ryan (1968), 11 Mich App 559, this Court resolved defendant’s argument by holding that the statutory crimes are distinct. The prosecutor may use his discretion in proceeding under either statute. The facts encompassed the crime charged, and therefore, the prosecutor did not abuse his discretion.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant contends his jury conviction for taking possession and driving away a motor vehicle, under CL 1948, § 750.413 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.645), denied him equal protection of the law. He argues that two statutes of unequal penalties apply to the same crime, the other statute being CL 1948, § 750.414 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28-.646). Thus, defendant contends he was subject to the arbitrary choice of the prosecutor as to which statute to apply.

[271]*271In People v. Ryan (1968), 11 Mich App 559, this Court resolved defendant’s argument by holding that the statutory crimes are distinct. The prosecutor may use his discretion in proceeding under either statute. The facts encompassed the crime charged, and therefore, the prosecutor did not abuse his discretion.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 Mich. App. 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-eineder-michctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack