Case ID: mich-app_34/html/0112-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PEOPLE v. SCHLEICHER
    Criminal Law — Plea op Guilty — Bargained Plea — Plea Negotiation — Parole Status.
    Valid acceptance of a bargained plea of guilty does not require that the record reflect the details of the plea negotiations or that an inquiry as to the defendant’s parole status be made or that the defendant be advised as to the effect of the plea on his parole status.
    Reperence por Points in Headnote
    21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law § 494.
    Appeal from Oakland, Clark J. Adams, J.
    Submitted Division 2 April 8, 1971, at Lansing.
    (Docket No. 10017.)
    Decided May 26, 1971.
    Larry Schleicher was convicted, on his plea of guilty, of the unlawful driving away of an automobile. Defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Frank, J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Thomas G. Plunkett, Prosecuting Attorney, and Frank R. Knox, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
    
      Kathryn Schindelar, for defendant on appeal.
    Before: Quinn, P. J., and R. B. Burns and McGregor, JJ.
   Per Curiam.

June 1, 1970, represented by counsel and on the scheduled trial date, defendant pleaded guilty to a second count added to the information that day on the oral motion of the prosecuting attorney with the approval of defendant’s counsel. The second count of the information charged defendant with a lesser offense than the first count. The plea was clearly a negotiated plea. Defendant was sentenced to prison.

Relying on People v. Taylor (1968), 9 Mich App 333, defendant contends on appeal that the plea procedure was reversibly faulty because the mandatory guidelines of Taylor were not followed. The guidelines referred to are the suggestions in Taylor that the record reflect the details of the plea negotiations and that inquiry was made as to defendant’s parole status and that he was advised of the effect of the plea on his parole status.

We reject defendant’s arguments on appeal for the following reasons:

1. The guidelines relied on were not mandatory.

2. People v. Taylor (1970), 383 Mich 338, reversed the Court of Appeals in Taylor, supra.

3. Defendant did not file a motion to withdraw his plea in the trial court. People v. Barron (1970), 27 Mich App 379.

Affirmed.