Case ID: mich-app_25/html/0136-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PEOPLE v. BOONE
    Criminal Law — Plea op Guilty — Consequences op Plea — Procedural Errors — Waiver.
    Failure to inform a defendant that his plea of guilty waives prior procedural errors was not a failure to inform him of the consequences of the plea as required by court rule (GOB 1963; 785.2, 785.3).
    Reference por Points in Headnote
    [1] 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law § 487.
    Court’s duty to advise or admonish accused as to consequences of plea of guilty, or to determine that he is advised thereof. 97 ALR2d 549.
    Appeal from Genesee, John W. Baker, J.
    Submitted Division 2 June 2, 1970, at Lansing.
    (Docket No. 7,150.)
    Decided June 30, 1970.
    Billy R. Boone was convicted, on his plea of guilty, of armed robbery. Defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Robert F. Leonard, Prosecuting Attorney, Donald A. Kuebler, Chief Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, and James Dillard, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
    
      Carl Bekofske, for defendant on appeal.
    Before: Lesinski, C. J., and Quinn and Rood, JJ.
    
      
       Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
    
   Per Curiam.

Appellant appeals from a conviction of armed robbery, contending that he was not informed of the consequences of a guilty plea because he was not informed that such a plea waived prior procedural errors. Under GCR 1963, 785.3 such information need not be given. People v. Dunn (1968) , 380 Mich 693.

The appellant also contends that he was not fully informed about the nature of the charge against him. The record does not bear out this contention.

The appellant relies on Boykin v. Alabama (1969) , 395 US 238, (89 S Ct 1709, 23 L Ed 2d 274). This Court is of the opinion that Boykin, supra, should be given prospective effect only. People v. Taylor (1970), 23 Mich App 595; People v. Butler (1970) , 23 Mich App 643. Therefore, it has no effect on this case. Furthermore, !the procedure followed below violates no rule laid down by Boykin, supra.

Affirmed.