People v. Gray

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Gray

199 N.W.2d 657, 38 Mich. App. 262

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 27, 1972

DocketDocket No. 10961

StatusPublished

This text of 199 N.W.2d 657 (People v. Gray) 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. Gray, 199 N.W.2d 657, 38 Mich. App. 262 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion.

Defendant was convicted of larceny by trick, a violation of MCLA 750.356; MSA 28.588. On appeal defendant complains that the form of the jury verdict was improper. The jury was properly polled and defendant did not object to the form of the verdict and presents no evidence that the form of the verdict was injurious to his rights. Defendant next argues that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a former offense under MCLA 768.27; MSA 28.1050, because the former offense was too remote in time to be relevant to the present offense. The offenses are sufficiently contemporaneous in time and analogous in circumstance to justify the trial court in admitting the evidence. People v Fleisb, 306 Mich 8 (1943). A review of the record reveals that the jury’s verdict is more than amply supported by the evidence. Defendant’s assignments of error are insubstantial.

Affirmed.

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

Memorandum Opinion.

Defendant was convicted of larceny by trick, a violation of MCLA 750.356; MSA 28.588. On appeal defendant complains that the form of the jury verdict was improper. The jury was properly polled and defendant did not object to the form of the verdict and presents no evidence that the form of the verdict was injurious to his rights. Defendant next argues that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a former offense under MCLA 768.27; MSA 28.1050, because the former offense was too remote in time to be relevant to the present offense. The offenses are sufficiently contemporaneous in time and analogous in circumstance to justify the trial court in admitting the evidence. People v Fleisb, 306 Mich 8 (1943). A review of the record reveals that the jury’s verdict is more than amply supported by the evidence. Defendant’s assignments of error are insubstantial.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 N.W.2d 657, 38 Mich. App. 262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gray-michctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack