Case ID: mich-app_24/html/0366-01.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. DANIEL
    Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Geraldine Bledsoe Ford, J.
    Submitted Division 1 April 28, 1970, at Grand Rapids.
    (Docket Nos. 8,650, 8,651.)
    Decided June 3, 1970.
    Leave to appeal denied August 19, 1970. 383 Mich 820.
    Franklin Daniel and Tyrone Carpenter were convicted, on their pleas of guilty, of assault with intent to rob being armed. Defendants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    
      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Cabalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Department, and Arthur N. Bishop, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
    
      Carl Levin (Defenders’ Office — Legal Aid and Defender’s Association of Detroit), for defendants on appeal.
    Before: T. M. Burns, P. J., and Fitzgerald and R. B. Burns, JJ.
   Per Curiam.

Defendants in these consolidated appeals seek review of their March 27, 1967 convictions, on pleas of guilty, of assault with intent to rob being armed in violation of MCLA § 750.89 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.284).

The people have filed a motion to affirm the convictions. GrCR 1963, 817.5(3).

Brief on appeal argues that the lower court’s examination of defendants at the plea proceedings failed to establish their participation in the crime and that the court failed to advise defendants of certain constitutional rights enumerated in Boykin v. Alabama (1969), 395 US 238 (89 S Ct 1709, 23 L Ed 2d 274).

The court’s examination of the defendants was sufficient to reveal their participation in the offense. Boykin v. Alabama, supra, is not retroactive. People v. Taylor (1970), 23 Mich App 595.

It is manifest that the questions sought to be reviewed on which the decision of the cause depends are so unsubstantial as to need no argument or formal submission.

Motion to affirm is granted.