Case Name: PEOPLE v. TALLEY
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1969-06-26
Citations: 18 Mich. App. 240
Docket Number: Docket No. 5,801
Parties: PEOPLE v. TALLEY
Judges: Before: J. H. Gillis, P. J., and R. B. Burns and V. J. Brennan, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 18
Pages: 240–241

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. TALLEY
Criminal Law — Trial—Instructions to Jury.
Defendant’s contentions that the court trying him for armed robbery committed reversible error in its charge to the jury, that the eourt improperly displayed a feeling that defendant was guilty, and that the eourt improperly denied defendant’s motion for a directed verdict held, without merit where the record fails to establish any of defendant’s elaims.
References for Points in Headnotes
46 Am Jur, Robbery § 58.
5 Am Jur 2d, Appeal and Error § 867.
Appeal from Berrien, Karl F. Ziclr, J.
Submitted Division 3 June 3, 1969, at Grand Rapids.
(Docket No. 5,801.)
Decided June 26, 1969.
Leave to appeal denied April 22, 1970.
See 383 Mich 777.
Ollie Lee Talley was convicted of armed robbery. Defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Ronald J. Taylor, Prosecuting Attorney, and Wilbur 8chillinger, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Paul Pollard and Robert E. Johnson, for defendant.
Before: J. H. Gillis, P. J., and R. B. Burns and V. J. Brennan, JJ.

Opinion:
J. H. Gillis, P. J.
The defendant was convicted of armed robbery MOLA § 750.529 (Stat Ann 1969 Hum Supp § 28.797) in a jury trial. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court committed reversible error in its charge to the jury and, further, that the trial court denied the defendant a fair trial by displaying its feeling of defendant's guilt to the jury and, finally, the defendant alleges that the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion for a directed verdict of acquittal.
An examination of the record fails to establish any of the defendant's claims of reversible error.
Affirmed.
All concurred.