People v. Gunner

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Gunner

61 Mich. App. 569

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 30, 1975

DocketDocket No. 21411

StatusPublished

This text of 61 Mich. App. 569 (People v. Gunner) 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. Gunner, 61 Mich. App. 569 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On April 23, 1974, defendant was [570]*570found guilty of violating probation. A warrant for probation violation was issued on May 7, 1973, 5 days prior to defendant’s release from the Detroit House of Correction. Upon his release from the house of correction, defendant returned to his home in Detroit, where he stayed until his arrest on April 22, 1974.

In People v Diamond, 59 Mich App 581; 229 NW2d 857 (1975), this Court held that "once a warrant for probation violation has been issued, the probation authorities must exercise due diligence in executing it”. It appears that the probation department had defendant’s address but made no attempt to have him arrested for almost a full year. There being no showing that the failure to serve the notice of violation of probation on defendant sooner was attributable to defendant, his conviction of probation violation is reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

On April 23, 1974, defendant was [570]*570found guilty of violating probation. A warrant for probation violation was issued on May 7, 1973, 5 days prior to defendant’s release from the Detroit House of Correction. Upon his release from the house of correction, defendant returned to his home in Detroit, where he stayed until his arrest on April 22, 1974.

In People v Diamond, 59 Mich App 581; 229 NW2d 857 (1975), this Court held that "once a warrant for probation violation has been issued, the probation authorities must exercise due diligence in executing it”. It appears that the probation department had defendant’s address but made no attempt to have him arrested for almost a full year. There being no showing that the failure to serve the notice of violation of probation on defendant sooner was attributable to defendant, his conviction of probation violation is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 Mich. App. 569, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gunner-michctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack