People v. McCoy

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. McCoy

183 N.W.2d 364, 27 Mich. App. 183, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1303

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 5, 1970

DocketDocket No. 7,928

StatusPublished

This text of 183 N.W.2d 364 (People v. McCoy) 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. McCoy, 183 N.W.2d 364, 27 Mich. App. 183, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1303 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This case is submitted on the people’s motion to affirm. Defendant has appealed from his conviction, upon a plea of guilty, of the charge of larceny from a person. MCLA § 750.357 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.589). Defendant, with benefit of counsel, tendered his plea on May 16, 1969, in Detroit Recorder’s Court. On appeal, he [184]*184claims the trial judge erred in failing to specifically obtain a waiver of three constitutional rights: the right to trial by jury; the privilege against self-incrimination; and the right to confront his accusers. He relies on Boykin v. Alabama (1969), 395 US 238 (89 S Ct 1709, 23 L Ed 2d 274).

Since we definitively determined the single issue defendant now raises in People v. Taylor (1970), 23 Mich App 595, there is manifestly no need for further consideration of defendant’s appeal. Motion to affirm is granted.

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

Per Curiam.

This case is submitted on the people’s motion to affirm. Defendant has appealed from his conviction, upon a plea of guilty, of the charge of larceny from a person. MCLA § 750.357 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.589). Defendant, with benefit of counsel, tendered his plea on May 16, 1969, in Detroit Recorder’s Court. On appeal, he [184]*184claims the trial judge erred in failing to specifically obtain a waiver of three constitutional rights: the right to trial by jury; the privilege against self-incrimination; and the right to confront his accusers. He relies on Boykin v. Alabama (1969), 395 US 238 (89 S Ct 1709, 23 L Ed 2d 274).

Since we definitively determined the single issue defendant now raises in People v. Taylor (1970), 23 Mich App 595, there is manifestly no need for further consideration of defendant’s appeal. Motion to affirm is granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 N.W.2d 364, 27 Mich. App. 183, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mccoy-michctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack