People v. Ray

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Ray

194 N.W.2d 24, 36 Mich. App. 710

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Ray. Read the opinion of the Court — 43 Mich. App. 45 →

Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided October 28, 1971·No. Docket No. 9796·Published

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion. After trial by the court sitting without a jury, the defendant was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape. MCLA § 750.85 (Stat Ann 1962 Bev § 28.280). On appeal, he claims that the trial court’s acceptance of his waiver of jury trial was inadequate and that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence; the people have filed a motion to affirm.

After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that it is manifest that the questions sought to be reviewed are so unsubstantial as to need no argument or formal submission.

Affirmed.

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

Memorandum Opinion. After trial by the court sitting without a jury, the defendant was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape. MCLA § 750.85 (Stat Ann 1962 Bev § 28.280). On appeal, he claims that the trial court’s acceptance of his waiver of jury trial was inadequate and that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion for new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence; the people have filed a motion to affirm.

After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that it is manifest that the questions sought to be reviewed are so unsubstantial as to need no argument or formal submission.

Affirmed.

People v. Ray, 194 N.W.2d 24, 36 Mich. App. 710 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

194 N.W.2d 24 (People v. Ray) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related