People v. Whitmer

181 N.W.2d 77, 25 Mich. App. 209, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1551
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Whitmer. Read the opinion of the Court — 16 Mich. App. 703
Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1970·No. Docket No. 8,026·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On September 1, 1967, defendant was convicted by a jury of armed robbery, MCLA § 750.529 (Stat Ann 1970 Cum Supp § 28.797). Defendant filed a motion which the trial court construed as a delayed motion for new trial and from a denial of the motion, defendant appeals.

[210]*210Defendant contends initially that his representation by court-appointed counsel was ineffective. While defendant alleges that he was not afforded an opportunity to consult privately with his counsel, in its opinion denying defendant’s motion for new trial, the trial court stated that “defense counsel displayed a diligent effort to defend the accused, and appeared to be well informed of the facts of the case”. We find nothing in the record to support a finding that in so ruling the trial court erred. See People v. Crawford (1969), 16 Mich App 92.

Defendant’s additional allegations of error are without merit.

Affirmed.

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

People v. Whitmer, 181 N.W.2d 77, 25 Mich. App. 209, 1970 Mich. App. LEXIS 1551 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).

181 N.W.2d 77 (People v. Whitmer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Crawford
167 N.W.2d 814 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1969)