People v. Palmer

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Palmer

27 Mich. App. 334

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 26, 1970

DocketDocket No. 7,825

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 27 Mich. App. 334 (People v. Palmer) 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. Palmer, 27 Mich. App. 334 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a conviction of larceny from a person, MCLA § 750.357 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.589), contending that error was committed at trial and in police procedure before trial, with respect to his identification as the perpetrator of the offense. A review of the record discloses that there was a direct eyewitness identification and ample- evidence connecting defendant with the crime alleged to support a conclusion of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Defendant further contends that the complaint filed was fatally defective. We find this contention totally without merit, and, even if the allegation were meritorious, the record discloses that timely objection was not made to preserve the issue for appellate review. People v. Roney (1967), 7 Mich App 678; People v. Andriacci (1968), 11 Mich App 482.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a conviction of larceny from a person, MCLA § 750.357 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.589), contending that error was committed at trial and in police procedure before trial, with respect to his identification as the perpetrator of the offense. A review of the record discloses that there was a direct eyewitness identification and ample- evidence connecting defendant with the crime alleged to support a conclusion of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Defendant further contends that the complaint filed was fatally defective. We find this contention totally without merit, and, even if the allegation were meritorious, the record discloses that timely objection was not made to preserve the issue for appellate review. People v. Roney (1967), 7 Mich App 678; People v. Andriacci (1968), 11 Mich App 482.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 Mich. App. 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-palmer-michctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack