People v. Kennan

266 N.W. 468, 275 Mich. 452, 1936 Mich. LEXIS 574
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedApril 7, 1936
DocketDocket No. 113, Calendar No. 37,695.
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 266 N.W. 468 (People v. Kennan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Kennan, 266 N.W. 468, 275 Mich. 452, 1936 Mich. LEXIS 574 (Mich. 1936).

Opinion

Btjtzel, J.

On May 25, 1932, a grand jury returned an indictment, not set forth in the record, against Oscar L. Green and appellant Charles M. Kennan. On June 5, 1933, an amended indictment was filed by the prosecutor charging Kennan with aiding and abetting Green in the embezzlement, abstraction and misapplication of $4,500 of the funds of the American State Bank in connection with what is hereinafter referred to as the Willys transaction. On May 22, 1933, Green withdrew his former plea and’ entered one of guilty of the charge contained in the sixth count of the original joint indictment. Although the amended indictment purports to be that of the grand jury, it was filed several months after *454 the jury had been discharged and the law under which it was called had been repealed by the legislature. At the trial, upon the conclusion of the testimony and under the charge of the court, the jury was instructed to consider only counts three and five of the indictment. Count three charges aiding and abetting in the abstraction and count five in the misapplication of $4,500 of the bank’s funds and property arising out of the so-called Willys transaction. Kennan was convicted and sentenced to a term of 3% to 20 years, a part of which he has already served. In his appeal, he appears in propria persona and has filed his own brief together with a bill of exceptions. Both are very crude in form, but we take occasion to commend the action of the assistant attorney general in assisting the court not only in presenting the State’s side of the case, but also in the fairest manner that of appellant so that we can overlook the many technical deficiencies in appellant’s presentation of his claims of error.

Appellant contends that he was not convicted on any proper indictment. It is true that there is attached to the amended indictment a certification with only a typewritten signature of the foreman of the grand jury. Although it is dated May 25, 1932, it was filed much later and several months after the grand jury ceased to exist. It, however, is signed by the prosecutor and gives full details as to the charges against appellant. The record does not show that any objection whatsoever was made to the amended indictment at the time of the trial or on the motion for a new trial or in the assignments of error. Its regularity is attacked for the first time in the brief for appellant in this court. By going so far without objections, appellant waived any right he may have had to object to the amended indictment. In re *455 Krusiewicz, 263 Mich. 74, 76; 3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 17290. Moreover, section 17290 provides that

“The court may at any time before, during or after the trial amend the indictment in respect to any defect, imperfection or omission in form or substance or of any variance with the evidence. ’ ’

The official record on file in this court shows that .a motion to amend the indictment was duly made and granted by the court. The amended indictment did not charge a crime different from the offense set out in the original, but merely omitted some of the grounds underlying the charge. The amended indictment was proper.

Error is claimed because the name of Oscar L. Green was not indorsed on the indictment as a res gestes witness. Hurd v. People, 25 Mich. 405, 415; People v. Grant, 111 Mich. 346. When one is charged with aiding and abetting a criminal, it lies within the sound discretion of the prosecution to refuse to indorse the name of the criminal as a witness. People v. Raider, 256 Mich. 131, 136; People v. McCullough, 81 Mich. 25, 34. Green had not been sentenced at the time of the trial, but by his plea of guilt he acknowledged the criminality of his act. The advisability of calling Green as a witness rested with the prosecution. It may become advisable, on the one hand, in the absence of other evidence, to rely upon testimony of a principal to show that the party charged with aiding and abetting him had guilty knowledge of the criminal act. On the other hand, the testimony of a self-avowed criminal might be so wholly untrustworthy as to make it inadvisable to call him to the witness stand. At any rate, the prosecution in the instant case acted within its *456 “sound discretion” in refusing to indorse Green’s name as a witness. •

Of the many other questions raised by appellant, the only one of merit is whether the verdict was against the great weight of the testimony. Although this question is not set forth in proper form, it arises out of a large number of other questions that appellant has incorporated in his brief and is discussed both by appellant and prosecution. Oscar L.. Green was the vice-president in charge of the real estate and mortgage department of the American State Bank of Detroit. Kennan was a real estate dealer who was a very frequent visitor at the bank. • Kennan testified that he met Green in 1926 in some business transactions and had considerable business with the bank thereafter practically all of which had been through or with Green. He was in the bank, on occasions, two and three times a day, especially when he was busy closing deals. He had approximately 30 deals with Green in about two years. Kennan adjusted land contract interests for the bank and assisted in the collection of mortgages for which he was not paid. He purchased real estate equities from Green and the customers of the bank and borrowed from the bank rather extensively. Unquestionably he was very close to Green. Appellant states that almost all his dealings with the bank were with Green, an officer of the bank and head of the mortgage department, and that he trusted Green all the time he was there. It seems quite apparent that, under such circumstances, Kennan or any other prudent person would have reason to believe that Green as vice-president of the bank had considerable power and authority. The Willys transaction upon which the indictment is founded occurred as follows: John and Katherine Willy were purchas *457 ing on land contract from one Edgar B. Whitcomb property on Pern avenne in the city of Detroit, improved with a duplex and garage. The purchase price was $13,000 and payments had been made so as to reduce the balance to approximately $4,500 in 1927. In that year, a farm in Sanilac county, which they had mortgaged to the First National Bank of Yale, Michigan, was foreclosed and the bank of Yale obtained a deficiency decree against them for approximately $2,000. They settled the decree by turning over to the bank the Whitcomb contract for the purchase of the Pern avenue property. The bank in turn gave them a new contract in which the consideration was placed at the amount they still owed Whitcomb, plus the amount of the deficiency, totaling $6,517.30. The bank thus became the assignee and vendee of the original Whitcomb contract, and vendor on a subcontract for the sale of the property to the Willys for an amount equal to that due Whitcomb plus the amount of the deficiency decree due the bank.

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

Related

People v. Pearson
273 N.W.2d 856 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1979)
People v. Wilkins
266 N.W.2d 781 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1978)
People v. Batten
156 N.W.2d 640 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1967)
People v. Livermore
155 N.W.2d 711 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1967)
In Re Elliott
24 N.W.2d 528 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1947)
People v. Allen
300 N.W. 59 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
266 N.W. 468, 275 Mich. 452, 1936 Mich. LEXIS 574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kennan-mich-1936.