Opinion
Docket No. 3,277.
Decided March 26, 1968.
Appeal from Recorder's Court of Detroit; Wood (Andrew C.), J. Submitted Division 1 December 7, 1967, at Detroit. (Docket No. 3,277.) Decided March 26, 1968.
Rodolfo Limas was convicted of reckless driving on January 10, 1967. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Cahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, and Richard J. Padzieski, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Peter L. LaDuke, for defendant.
Defendant was convicted of reckless driving by the recorder's court traffic division in the city of Detroit after he twice collided with complainant's car and then sped off on the approach of a police officer who gave chase with defendant running red lights before his apprehension.
The complainant charges defendant with the violation of PA 1949, No 300, § 626. Defendant alleges that the complaint is defective in that this statute no longer exists due to the various amendments made, and that the complaint did not sufficiently specify the conduct complained of. The language of the amendatory act (PA 1965, No 262) refers to and includes PA 1949, No 300, § 626, the original reckless driving statute, and at no point repeals the original act. The complaint and warrant are sufficiently detailed as to defendant's conduct. Haskins v. Ralston (1888), 69 Mich. 63. See, also, 50 Am Jur, Statutes, § 468, pp 481, 482; People v. Lowell (1930), 250 Mich. 349.
See CLS 1952, § 257.626 (Stat Ann 1951 Cum Supp § 9.2326).
See MCLA § 257.626 (Stat Ann 1968 Cum Supp § 9.2326).
Defendant alleges that his conviction of reckless driving was in error as the evidence was not sufficient to show that he was driving in a willful and wanton manner. If one considers the sum total of all the factors of defendant's conduct, sufficient facts are found to sustain this conviction. Brooks v. Haack (1965), 374 Mich. 261.
Affirmed.
LESINSKI, C.J., and McGREGOR, J., concurred.