People v. Sharp

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Sharp

188 N.W.2d 151, 32 Mich. App. 49, 1971 Mich. App. LEXIS 1839

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 26, 1971

DocketDocket 9932

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 188 N.W.2d 151 (People v. Sharp) 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. Sharp, 188 N.W.2d 151, 32 Mich. App. 49, 1971 Mich. App. LEXIS 1839 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinions

Fitzgerald, P. J.

On February 18, 1970, Vernon A. Sharp, defendant, was arrested and charged with sale of narcotics, a violation of MCLA § 335.152 (Stat Ann 1957 Rev § 18.1122). Subsequently, on March 13, 1970, while represented by counsel, defendant entered a plea of guilty to an added second count of possession of narcotics, a violation of MCLA § 335.153 (Stat Ann 1957 Rev §18.1123). On May 15, 1970, he was sentenced to serve nine to ten years in prison. Defendant now appeals of right from an order of the trial court denying his motion to withdraw the plea.

The only question raised on this appeal is whether the trial court complied with the requirements of taking a guilty plea, as set forth in Boykin v. Alabama (1969), 395 US 238 (89 S Ct 1709, 23 L Ed 2d 274). Specifically, we are concerned with the trial court’s failure to advise defendant of his privilege against compulsory self-incrimination.

The Michigan Supreme Court recently addressed itself to an interpretation of the Boykin requirements in People v. Taylor (1970), 383 Mich 338, 355, 356, which stated:

[51]*51“The Court did not say, as some have suggested, that explicit and expressed waivers must be taken upon each of these constitutional rights before the plea can be accepted.

“The holding is more properly that these rights are waived by the act of entering the guilty plea, and it is for this reason that a record must be made upon the question of voluntariness.”

The same reasoning and interpretation was also applied by this Court in People v. Jaworski (1970), 25 Mich App 540.

Therefore, in light of the above decisions as well as the record made in the taking of the present guilty plea, we conclude that defendant’s plea was voluntarily and understandingly made. The failure of the trial court to mention the privilege against self-incrimination was not fatal.

Affirmed.

Holbrook, J., concurred.

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

Fitzgerald, P. J.

On February 18, 1970, Vernon A. Sharp, defendant, was arrested and charged with sale of narcotics, a violation of MCLA § 335.152 (Stat Ann 1957 Rev § 18.1122). Subsequently, on March 13, 1970, while represented by counsel, defendant entered a plea of guilty to an added second count of possession of narcotics, a violation of MCLA § 335.153 (Stat Ann 1957 Rev §18.1123). On May 15, 1970, he was sentenced to serve nine to ten years in prison. Defendant now appeals of right from an order of the trial court denying his motion to withdraw the plea.

The only question raised on this appeal is whether the trial court complied with the requirements of taking a guilty plea, as set forth in Boykin v. Alabama (1969), 395 US 238 (89 S Ct 1709, 23 L Ed 2d 274). Specifically, we are concerned with the trial court’s failure to advise defendant of his privilege against compulsory self-incrimination.

The Michigan Supreme Court recently addressed itself to an interpretation of the Boykin requirements in People v. Taylor (1970), 383 Mich 338, 355, 356, which stated:

[51]*51“The Court did not say, as some have suggested, that explicit and expressed waivers must be taken upon each of these constitutional rights before the plea can be accepted.

“The holding is more properly that these rights are waived by the act of entering the guilty plea, and it is for this reason that a record must be made upon the question of voluntariness.”

The same reasoning and interpretation was also applied by this Court in People v. Jaworski (1970), 25 Mich App 540.

Therefore, in light of the above decisions as well as the record made in the taking of the present guilty plea, we conclude that defendant’s plea was voluntarily and understandingly made. The failure of the trial court to mention the privilege against self-incrimination was not fatal.

Affirmed.

Holbrook, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 N.W.2d 151, 32 Mich. App. 49, 1971 Mich. App. LEXIS 1839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sharp-michctapp-1971.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack