People v. Syed

Michigan Supreme Court

People v. Syed

229 N.W.2d 1, 394 Mich. 105

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedMay 8, 1975

Docket56386

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 229 N.W.2d 1 (People v. Syed) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Syed, 229 N.W.2d 1, 394 Mich. 105 (Mich. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

*105 ORDER

Entered May 8, 1975. — Reporter.

On order of the Court, the application by defendant-appellant for leave to appeal is considered, and the same is granted. This Court, sua sponte, under GCR 1963, 865.1(7) peremptorily reverses the defendant’s conviction and remands for a new trial because the trial court erred in refusing a requested instruction on the lesser offense of possession.

While the defendant admitted that he "delivered” (MCLA 335.341; MSA 18.1070[41]) a tinfoil package, he denied that such action was culpable. The jury could have disbelieved defendant’s statement as to how he came into possession of the package, found his possession thereof to be culpable, and yet could have concluded that his delivery of the package was non-culpable. If the jury so concluded, "the record contains evidence which would support a conviction”, People v Fountain, 392 Mich 395, 401; 221 NW2d 375 (1974), of the lesser offense of possession.

*106 M. S. Coleman, J., dissenting. Swainson, J., not participating.

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

*105 ORDER

Entered May 8, 1975. — Reporter.

On order of the Court, the application by defendant-appellant for leave to appeal is considered, and the same is granted. This Court, sua sponte, under GCR 1963, 865.1(7) peremptorily reverses the defendant’s conviction and remands for a new trial because the trial court erred in refusing a requested instruction on the lesser offense of possession.

While the defendant admitted that he "delivered” (MCLA 335.341; MSA 18.1070[41]) a tinfoil package, he denied that such action was culpable. The jury could have disbelieved defendant’s statement as to how he came into possession of the package, found his possession thereof to be culpable, and yet could have concluded that his delivery of the package was non-culpable. If the jury so concluded, "the record contains evidence which would support a conviction”, People v Fountain, 392 Mich 395, 401; 221 NW2d 375 (1974), of the lesser offense of possession.

*106 M. S. Coleman, J., dissenting. Swainson, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 N.W.2d 1, 394 Mich. 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-syed-mich-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack