People v. Fargo

23 Mich. App. 81
Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided March 30, 1970·No. Docket No. 7,073·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This case is submitted on the people’s motion to affirm pursuant to GCR 1963, 817.5(3). Represented by counsel, defendant pled guilty to unauthorized use of a motor vehicle contrary to MCLA § 750.414 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.646). Following denial of his motion to withdraw the plea and vacate sentence, defendant appeals as of right.

Defendant argues that the trial court failed to determine with a reasonable degree of certainty whether he committed the offense charged. A review of the transcript reveals that the trial court fulfilled its responsibilities under GCR 1963, 785.3 (2). Moreover, it is well settled that a convicted defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence, and he has the burden of showing something more than technical noncompliance with the court rules in order to vacate a guilty plea. People v. Nelson (1969), 18 Mich App 177.

The motion to affirm is granted.

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

People v. Fargo, 23 Mich. App. 81 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).

23 Mich. App. 81 (People v. Fargo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Fargo
178 N.W.2d 137 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1973)
People v. Hamilton
194 N.W.2d 29 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1971)