People v. Swift

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Swift

169 N.W.2d 518, 17 Mich. App. 349, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1195

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 26, 1969

DocketDocket No. 4,319

StatusPublished

This text of 169 N.W.2d 518 (People v. Swift) 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. Swift, 169 N.W.2d 518, 17 Mich. App. 349, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1195 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant was found guilty of armed robbery at tbe conclusion of a jury trial and sentenced to from 7-1/2 to 15 years in prison.¹

Defendant has appealed alleging that tbe trial court committed error by refusing to require tbe prosecution to produce three persons who arrived at tbe scene of tbe crime within minutes of its commission.²

A review of tbe record shows that tbe persons were not eyewitnesses to tbe crime, nor was their identity known to tbe prosecution. Tbe testimony of police officers on a separate record provided ample evidence that due diligence was exercised to ascertain tbe identity of tbe persons in question. No error bas been committed when it is shown that officers have made a diligent search for and have been unable to locate witnesses. People v. Castelli (1963), 370 Mich 147. The prosecution was under no obligation to produce unknown witnesses. People v. Todaro (1931), 253 Mich 367.

Tbe other questions raised on appeal do not merit discussion.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant was found guilty of armed robbery at tbe conclusion of a jury trial and sentenced to from 7-1/2 to 15 years in prison.¹

Defendant has appealed alleging that tbe trial court committed error by refusing to require tbe prosecution to produce three persons who arrived at tbe scene of tbe crime within minutes of its commission.²

A review of tbe record shows that tbe persons were not eyewitnesses to tbe crime, nor was their identity known to tbe prosecution. Tbe testimony of police officers on a separate record provided ample evidence that due diligence was exercised to ascertain tbe identity of tbe persons in question. No error bas been committed when it is shown that officers have made a diligent search for and have been unable to locate witnesses. People v. Castelli (1963), 370 Mich 147. The prosecution was under no obligation to produce unknown witnesses. People v. Todaro (1931), 253 Mich 367.

Tbe other questions raised on appeal do not merit discussion.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 N.W.2d 518, 17 Mich. App. 349, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-swift-michctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack