People v. Wilson
This text of 224 N.W. 607 (People v. Wilson) 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.
Opinion
Defendant was convicted of violation of the prohibition law. Thirty-three days after verdict he made a motion for a new trial. The statute, Act No. 175, Pub. Acts 1927, chap. 10, § 2, provides:
"Motions for new trials shall be made within 30 days after verdict, and not afterwards."
The time is jurisdictional, and the motion came too late.Nichols v. Houghton Circuit Judge,
It is contended that one of the jurors, Mrs. Alexander Lee, otherwise competent, was disqualified because her name did not appear on the assessment roll of her township (3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 12190), and the fact was not discovered until after trial. When drawn as a juror, she was not challenged for *Page 284
cause on that ground. The objection was waived. People v.Avery,
Judgment is affirmed.
FELLOWS, WIEST, CLARK, McDONALD, and SHARPE, JJ., concurred. NORTH, C.J., and POTTER, J., did not sit.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
224 N.W. 607, 246 Mich. 282, 1929 Mich. LEXIS 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wilson-mich-1929.