Case Name: PEOPLE v. ANDERSON
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1974-04-30
Citations: 53 Mich. App. 60
Docket Number: Docket No. 16531
Parties: PEOPLE v ANDERSON
Judges: Before: R. B. Burns, P. J., and Allen and O’Hara, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 53
Pages: 60–67

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v ANDERSON
Opinion of the Court
1. Criminal Law — Competency—Hearing—Waiver.
A defendant who was incompetent could not intelligently waive or abandon a hearing to determine his competency to stand trial.
2. Criminal Law — Sentence—Presentence Report — Prior Convictions.
A sentencing court did not have a duty to investigate, sua sponte, the constitutional validity of a defendant’s prior convictions which were listed in a presentence report where the defendant had not established that the prior convictions were invalid and where the defendant did not allege before the sentencing court that the convictions were constitutionally infirm.
3. Criminal Law — Sentence—Presentence Report — Objections.
A defendant’s presentence report was properly subject to the sentencing court’s "inquiry, review and consideration” where the defendant failed to contend that the presentence report was inaccurate or unreliable, and where the defendant failed to produce any proof that the presentence report was somehow infirm.
Dissent by Allen, J.
4. Criminal Law — Competency Hearing — Waiver or Abandonment.
A trial court’s failure to hold a hearing to determine competency to stand trial for a defendant who had given notice that incompetency might be used as a defense and who was commit ted to the Forensic Service Center for examination was not error where the defendant was found to be competent at the forensic center, where the defendant through his counsel deliberately chose to abandon the defense of incompetency, and where the record fails to reveal any manifestations of mental incompetency on the part of the defendant.
References for Points in Headnotes
[1, 4] 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law § 26 et seq.
21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law §§ 303, 324, 337, 584, 585. Defendant’s right to disclosure of presentence report. 40 ALR3d 681.
Court’s right, in imposing sentence, to hear evidence of, or to consider, other offenses committed by defendant. 96 ALR2d 768.
Appeal from Calhoun, Ronald M. Ryan, J.
Submitted Division 3 February 5, 1974, at Grand Rapids.
(Docket No. 16531.)
Decided April 30, 1974.
Leave to appeal applied for.
James F. Anderson was convicted, on his plea of guilty, of manslaughter. Defendant appeals.
Remanded for a competency hearing with instructions.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and Stanley Everett, Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Norris J. Thomas, Jr., Assistant State Appellate Defender, for the people.
Before: R. B. Burns, P. J., and Allen and O’Hara, JJ.
Former Supreme Court Justice, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Const 1963, art 6, § 23 as amended in 1968.

Opinion:
R. B. Burns, P. J.
This case was originally assigned to Judge Allen for the preparation of the Court's opinion. He has fully set forth the necessary facts and we agree with his opinion, except as to the trial court's failure to hold a hearing on the question of the defendant's competency upon his return from the forensic center.
In our opinion, once the question of competency is raised, the statute must be followed. A defendant who is incompetent could not intelligently waive or abandon such a hearing.
Therefore, in accordance with People v Lucas, 47 Mich App 385; 209 NW2d 436 (1973), we remand the case to the trial court and direct a competency hearing to be conducted. If defendant is found to have been competent to stand trial at the time he pled guilty, his conviction is affirmed. Contrariwise, if defendant is found to have been incompetent to stand trial at the time he pled guilty, his conviction shall be set aside and a new trial granted. We do not retain jurisdiction.
O'Hara, J., concurred.