From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Morgan

Michigan Court of Appeals
Dec 8, 1970
28 Mich. App. 594 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)

Opinion

Docket No. 9508.

Decided December 8, 1970.

Appeal from Wayne, John R. Murphy, J. Submitted Division 1 October 20, 1970, at Detroit. (Docket No. 9508.) Decided December 8, 1970.

Edgie Lee Morgan was convicted, on his plea of guilty, of assault with intent to rob being armed. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Cahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Department, and Arthur N. Bishop, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

William R. Stackpoole, for defendant on appeal.

Before: J.H. GILLIS, P.J., and V.J. BRENNAN and O'HARA, JJ.

Former Supreme Court Justice, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Const 1963, art 6, § 23 as amended in 1968.


Defendant was originally charged with armed robbery. In the presence of counsel, he pleaded guilty to the lesser included offense of assault with intent to rob while armed. On appeal he seeks to withdraw the plea claiming that the acceptance was invalid because of the failure of the trial judge to explain the differences between the elements of the offense originally charged and the offense to which he pleaded guilty. The people move to affirm.

No such explanation is required. GCR 1963, 785.3(2); People v. Torns (1970), 23 Mich. App. 238; People v. Bartlett (1969), 17 Mich. App. 205. It is not necessary that the record affirmatively show that the defendant was aware of the elements of the crimes. People v. Torns, supra; People v. Ferguson (1968), 13 Mich. App. 362.

Defendant also claims that the acceptance of his plea was invalid because the record does not affirmatively show that he drew the gun with which he was armed nor that his victims saw the gun before he took the money. At the time of defendant's plea he testified that he was armed with a gun, that he used the gun in committing the robbery, and that his victims saw the gun. There was ample testimony to show that defendant had committed the crime to which he pleaded guilty. MCLA § 750.89 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.284).

The trial judge did not err in accepting defendant's plea of guilty. Motion to affirm is granted.


Summaries of

People v. Morgan

Michigan Court of Appeals
Dec 8, 1970
28 Mich. App. 594 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
Case details for

People v. Morgan

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE v. MORGAN

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Dec 8, 1970

Citations

28 Mich. App. 594 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
184 N.W.2d 471

Citing Cases

People v. Marshall

(Emphasis supplied.) See, e.g., People v Morgan, 28 Mich. App. 594; 184 N.W.2d 471 (1970); People v Horace,…

People v. Madden

An explanation of the elements of the crime is not required. People v. Morgan (1970), 28 Mich. App. 594. The…