Case Name: PEOPLE v. HADDON; PEOPLE v. HINTON
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1971-05-27
Citations: 34 Mich. App. 157
Docket Number: Docket Nos. 10889, 11079
Parties: PEOPLE v. HADDON PEOPLE v. HINTON
Judges: Before : Danhof, P. J., and McGregor and Quinn, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 34
Pages: 157–158

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. HADDON PEOPLE v. HINTON
1. Criminal Law — Plea of Guilty — Enumeration of Eights.
’ Simultaneously advising guilty-pleading eodefendants of their constitutional rights was not error where the trial judge obtained individual responses from the codefendants.
2. Criminal Law — Plea of Guilty — Enumeration of Eights— Eight to Silence.
A trial judge is not required to advise a defendant of his right to remain silent.
Eeferences for Points in Headnotes
[1] 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law §§ 486-491.
[2] 29 Am Jur 2d, Evidence §§ 555-557.
Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Frank G. Schemanske, J.
Submitted Division 1 April 20, 1971, at Lansing.
(Docket Nos. 10889, 11079.)
Decided May 27, 1971.
Reginald Haddon and James Hinton were convicted, on their pleas of guilty, of unarmed robbery. 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 Ziemba, for defendants on appeal.
Before : Danhof, P. J., and McGregor and Quinn, JJ.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
These two cases were consolidated by order of this Court. The defendants and a third person pled guilty to an added count of robbery unarmed. MCLA § 750.530 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev §28.798).
On appeal the defendants claim it was error for the trial judge to advise them simultaneously of their rights, and to fail to advise them of their right to remain silent. The judge obtained individual responses from the defendants, and he was not required to advise them of their right to remain silent, although he did so advise defendant Haddon. People v. Jaworski (1970), 25 Mich App 540, leave to appeal granted (1970), 384 Mich 766; People v. Sepulvado (1970), 27 Mich App 66; and People v. Malcom (1970), 27 Mich App 205. The questions sought to be reviewed are so unsubstantial as to require no argument or formal submission.
Motion to affirm is granted.