Case ID: mich-app_17/html/0659-01.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. BECK
    1. Criminal Law — Larceny—Evidence.
    Witness’ testimony that he saw defendant remove money from the cash register in a store and his subsequent identification of defendant in a lineup was sufficient evidence for the court, sitting without a jury, to find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense of lareeny in a building (MOLA § 750.360).
    2. Criminal Law — Evidence—Trier of Pact.
    The measure of credence to be given any portion of the evidence presented is in the province of the trier of faet.
    References for Points in Headnotes
    [1] 32 Am Jur, Larceny § 135 et seq.
    
    [2] 5 Am Jur 2d, Appeal and Error § 831.
    Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Vincent J. Brennan, J. Submitted Division 1 April 22,1969, at Detroit.
    (Docket No. 5,446.)
    Decided June 23, 1969.
    Thomas Beck was convicted of larceny in a building. 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 Patricia J. Pernick, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
    
      Owen J. Galligan, for defendant on appeal.
    
      BEFORE: J. H. Gtllis, P. J., and Levin and Bronson, JJ.
   Per Curiam.

Defendant Thomas Beck was charged with larceny in a store. MCLA § 750.360 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.592). He waived trial by jury and was tried by the judge, convicted and sentenced.

At trial a witness testified that he saw the defendant reach over the counter, open the register, remove the money and leave the store. He further testified that he identified defendant in a show-up. The proprietor of the store testified that he had stepped out of his store for a moment, that as he re-entered the store the defendant was leaving, that he was informed of the theft and called police. He was unable to recognize the defendant at the show-up.

The appeal tests the sufficiency of the evidence for a finding of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The people have filed a motion to affirm the conviction. A review of the record discloses the presence of sufficient evidence, if believed, to support the judgment. The measure of credence to be given any portion of the evidence presented is in the province of the trier, of fact.

The motion to affirm the defendant’s conviction is granted.