People v. Ruzicka

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Ruzicka

172 N.W.2d 916, 19 Mich. App. 551, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 990

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 27, 1969

DocketDocket No. 5,825

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 172 N.W.2d 916 (People v. Ruzicka) 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. Ruzicka, 172 N.W.2d 916, 19 Mich. App. 551, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 990 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On appeal to circuit court from his conviction in municipal court for operating a mo[552]*552tor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor contrary to MCLA § 257.625 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 9.2325), a jury found defendant guilty of the same offense. He was sentenced and he appeals.

It is defendant’s contention that he was entitled to the benefit of MCLA § 257.625b (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 9.2325 [2]), and .that it was reversible error for the trial judge to refuse to give a requested instruction that defendant might be found guilty of impaired driving under the latter statute.

December 23, 1966, defendant was arrested for driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. MCLA § 257.625b was added by PA 1966, No 243, effective March 10,1967. In denying defendant’s requested instruction on impaired driving, the trial judge ruled that MCLA § 257.625b was ex post facto and inapplicable to the offense of December 23, 1966.

The trial judge was correct; see People v. Marshall (1961), 362 Mich 170, 174.

Affirmed.

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