People v. Leflore
This text of 174 N.W.2d 286 (People v. Leflore) 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.
Opinion
PEOPLE
v.
LEFLORE
Michigan Court of Appeals.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Cahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, and Leonard Meyers, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
George W. Schudlich, for defendant on appeal.
Before: BRONSON, P.J., and QUINN and DANHOF, JJ.
*589 PER CURIAM.
This case is submitted on the people's motion to dismiss, properly a motion to affirm under GCR 1963, 817.5(3). On June 13, 1969, defendant was convicted, on a plea of guilty, of using a motor vehicle without authority but without intent to steal (MCLA § 750.414 [Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.546]). On July 14, 1969, he was sentenced to serve 1-1/2 to 2 years in prison.
On appeal, defendant asserts he was induced to enter a plea of guilty to the above offense, which carries a maximum sentence of two years, rather than risk conviction of the greater offense of taking possession of and driving away a motor vehicle (MCLA § 750.413 [Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.645]), originally charged. The argument lacks merit. A fulfilled promise of charge reduction is not ground for vacating a guilty plea even if the plea was induced thereby. People v. Kindell (1969), 17 Mich App 22.
Motion to affirm is granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
174 N.W.2d 286, 20 Mich. App. 588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-leflore-michctapp-1992.