People v. Ingram

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Ingram

192 N.W.2d 647, 35 Mich. App. 423

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 30, 1971

DocketDocket No. 10734

StatusPublished

This text of 192 N.W.2d 647 (People v. Ingram) 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. Ingram, 192 N.W.2d 647, 35 Mich. App. 423 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals his nonjury conviction and sentence for breaking and entering with intent to commit a larceny contrary to MCLA § 750.110 (Stat Ann 1970 Cum Supp § 28.305). The people have moved to affirm.

Defendant assigns error for the reason that the people failed to endorse a res gestae witness. However, the res gestae witness became known at trial and defendant did not move for his endorsement. The failure to endorse may not be raised for the first time on appeal. People v. Logan (1971), 32 Mich App 354; People v. Printess C. Jackson (1968), 11 Mich App 727; People v. Rimson (1966), 3 Mich App 713.

Furthermore, the record supports the identification of defendant as the person who committed the crime, and contains ample evi[424]*424dence to support his conviction. Accordingly, defendant’s allegation is so unsubstantial that no argument or formal submission is required. Motion to affirm is granted.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals his nonjury conviction and sentence for breaking and entering with intent to commit a larceny contrary to MCLA § 750.110 (Stat Ann 1970 Cum Supp § 28.305). The people have moved to affirm.

Defendant assigns error for the reason that the people failed to endorse a res gestae witness. However, the res gestae witness became known at trial and defendant did not move for his endorsement. The failure to endorse may not be raised for the first time on appeal. People v. Logan (1971), 32 Mich App 354; People v. Printess C. Jackson (1968), 11 Mich App 727; People v. Rimson (1966), 3 Mich App 713.

Furthermore, the record supports the identification of defendant as the person who committed the crime, and contains ample evi[424]*424dence to support his conviction. Accordingly, defendant’s allegation is so unsubstantial that no argument or formal submission is required. Motion to affirm is granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 N.W.2d 647, 35 Mich. App. 423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ingram-michctapp-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack