People v. Horvath

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Horvath

181 N.W.2d 646, 25 Mich. App. 649, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1630

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 3, 1970

DocketDocket 7,861

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 181 N.W.2d 646 (People v. Horvath) 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. Horvath, 181 N.W.2d 646, 25 Mich. App. 649, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1630 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant, while represented by counsel, pled guilty to the lesser included offense of assault with intent to rob being armed contrary to MCLA § 750.89 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.284). He was subsequently sentenced to a term of six to ten years imprisonment. Through appointed appellate counsel, defendant filed a timely claim of appeal grounded solely on the contention that the plea was involuntary because defendant failed to expressly admit each and every element of the crime. The people filed a motion to affirm the conviction on the grounds that the question presented is unsubstantial. Subsequently, defendant filed a supplemental brief grounded on the contention that the plea was induced under threats made by a police officer that an alleged involuntary confession would be used if defendant did not plead guilty. This supplemental charge is supported by affidavit. Presently before this Court is the motion to affirm previously filed.

The elements of the crime were explained to the defendant, who expressly indicated that he understood each of them. The record contradicts the contention that defendant did not admit the elements of the crime. People v. Best (1970), 21 Mich App 156.

The contention raised in defendant’s supplemental brief is that the plea was involuntary, having been induced by an existing involuntary confession. This contention is without merit on either of two grounds. First, the proper forum for entertaining a post-plea allegation of involuntariness not supported by the record is the trial court. People v. Dorner (1970), 24 Mich App 306; People v. Kenny Smith (1969), 20 *651 Mich. App 307; see also Chief Justice T. E. Brennan’s remarks in People v. Taylor (1970), 383 Mich 338, at p 359.

Second, assuming the truth of the facts asserted, the allegation is legally insufficient to contest the plea proceeding. See People v. Temple (1970), 23 Mich App 651, which adopts the rule recently announced by the United States Supreme Court in McMann v. Richardson (1970), 397 US 759 (90 S Ct 1441, 25 L Ed 2d 763). All contrary prior decisions of this Court are hereby superseded. *

The motion to affirm is granted.

*

People v. Carlisle (1969), 19 Mich App 680; People v. Carlton (1966), 5 Mich App 20; People v. Daniels (1966), 2 Mich App 395.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant, while represented by counsel, pled guilty to the lesser included offense of assault with intent to rob being armed contrary to MCLA § 750.89 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.284). He was subsequently sentenced to a term of six to ten years imprisonment. Through appointed appellate counsel, defendant filed a timely claim of appeal grounded solely on the contention that the plea was involuntary because defendant failed to expressly admit each and every element of the crime. The people filed a motion to affirm the conviction on the grounds that the question presented is unsubstantial. Subsequently, defendant filed a supplemental brief grounded on the contention that the plea was induced under threats made by a police officer that an alleged involuntary confession would be used if defendant did not plead guilty. This supplemental charge is supported by affidavit. Presently before this Court is the motion to affirm previously filed.

The elements of the crime were explained to the defendant, who expressly indicated that he understood each of them. The record contradicts the contention that defendant did not admit the elements of the crime. People v. Best (1970), 21 Mich App 156.

The contention raised in defendant’s supplemental brief is that the plea was involuntary, having been induced by an existing involuntary confession. This contention is without merit on either of two grounds. First, the proper forum for entertaining a post-plea allegation of involuntariness not supported by the record is the trial court. People v. Dorner (1970), 24 Mich App 306; People v. Kenny Smith (1969), 20 *651 Mich. App 307; see also Chief Justice T. E. Brennan’s remarks in People v. Taylor (1970), 383 Mich 338, at p 359.

Second, assuming the truth of the facts asserted, the allegation is legally insufficient to contest the plea proceeding. See People v. Temple (1970), 23 Mich App 651, which adopts the rule recently announced by the United States Supreme Court in McMann v. Richardson (1970), 397 US 759 (90 S Ct 1441, 25 L Ed 2d 763). All contrary prior decisions of this Court are hereby superseded. *

The motion to affirm is granted.

*

People v. Carlisle (1969), 19 Mich App 680; People v. Carlton (1966), 5 Mich App 20; People v. Daniels (1966), 2 Mich App 395.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 N.W.2d 646, 25 Mich. App. 649, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-horvath-michctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack