Case Name: PEOPLE v. ANDERSON
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1970-03-27
Citations: 23 Mich. App. 9
Docket Number: Docket No. 5,596
Parties: PEOPLE v. ANDERSON
Judges: Before: Lesinski, C. J., and Quinn and V. J. Brennan, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 23
Pages: 9–10

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. ANDERSON
Criminal Law — Plea op Guilty — Acceptance op Plea.
A defendant must be allowed to withdraw his plea of guilty where the inquiry into the truthfulness of the plea was inadequate, in that defendant said that the facts related at the preliminary examination were partially true but no inquiry was made to determine what was. true and what was not.
Reference for Points in Headnote
21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law § 505.
Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Thomas L. Poindexter, J.
Submitted Division 1 March 3, 1970, at Detroit.
(Docket No. 5,596.)
Decided March 27, 1970.
Richard Gamaliel Anderson was convicted, on his plea of guilty, of murder in the second degree. Defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
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.
Gerald 8. Surowiec, for defendant on appeal.
Before: Lesinski, C. J., and Quinn and V. J. Brennan, JJ.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Defendant was charged with murder in the first degree. MCLA § 750.316 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.548). Trial was set for February 2, 1968. On that date, defendant, with counsel present, waived a jury trial and pleaded guilty of murder in the second degree. MCLA § 750.317 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.549).
Despite the trial court's thorough inquiry into the voluntariness of defendant's plea, this Court cannot ignore the equivocation surrounding the inquiry into the truthfulness of the plea. Asked whether the facts related at the preliminary examination were true, defendant answered, "Partially, yes." The court then asked, "It was approximately true?", and the defendant answered "Yes." The record is void of any further inquiry to determine what was true and what was not. Because of the uncertainty created by defendant's answer, we remand this case for an order permitting withdrawal of the plea. People v. Creger (1969), 16 Mich App 59.
Reversed and remanded.