Court Opinion

ID: 9577202
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:32:52.239666+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:20:07.336456
License: Public Domain

R. B. Burns, P. J.
Defendant pled guilty to breaking and entering an occupied dwelling with the intent to commit larceny. MCLA 750.110; MSA 28.305.
At that hearing the trial judge did not inform the defendant of his privilege against self incrimination as required by People v Jaworski, 387 Mich 21; 194 NW2d 868 (1972).
At sentencing, approximately two weeks later, the trial judge attempted to correct this oversight. The following colloquy took place:
"The Court: You understand now and you understood then when you entered a plea of guilty you were waiving your right to a trial?
"The Defendant: Yes.
*251’’The Court: You knew that you had a right to remain silent, didn’t you?
’’The Defendant: Yes, sir.”
The thrust of Jaworski is that the defendant should be informed of the rights he loses by pleading guilty in order that he may make an intelligent choice and understand the consequences of such a plea. Accepting the plea and then informing a defendant of his rights at a later date prevents the plea from being entered freely, understandingly and voluntarily as required by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Allen, J., concurred.