From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Charles Jackson

Michigan Court of Appeals
Jan 27, 1970
21 Mich. App. 132 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)

Opinion

Docket No. 6,046.

Decided January 27, 1970. Leave to appeal denied August 19, 1970. 383 Mich. 820.

Appeal from Wayne, Thomas E. Brennan, J. Submitted Division 1 January 7, 1970, at Detroit. (Docket No. 6,046.) Decided January 27, 1970. Leave to appeal denied August 19, 1970. 383 Mich. 820.

Charles Jackson, Jr., was convicted of robbery unarmed. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Cahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Samuel J. Torina, Chief Appellate Lawyer, and Angelo A. Pentolino, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

Richard Thompson, for defendant on appeal.

Before: LESINSKI, C.J., and J.H. GILLIS and QUINN, JJ.


Convicted by jury verdict of and sentenced for robbery unarmed, MCLA § 750.530 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.798), defendant appeals. He contends on appeal that the trial judge erred reversibly in two instructions given to the jury, and he admits no requests to instruct were made nor was there objection to the instructions as given.

Commencing with People v. Mallory (1966), 2 Mich. App. 359, this Court has consistently held that to preserve alleged errors in instructions for review, the mandates of GCR 1963, 516.2 must be complied with. The exceptions to this consistent holding have involved omissions to instruct or errors in instructing on basic and controlling issues. In the latter situation, we have noted the error although GCR 1963, 516.2 was not complied with to prevent manifest injustice. This, we believe, is consistent with the intent and philosophy of MCLA §§ 768.29 and 769.26 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev §§ 28.1052 and 28.1096) and GCR 1963, 529.1. It is also consistent with the unanimous view of the Supreme Court. Hunt v. Deming (1965), 375 Mich. 581.

In the case before us, defendant relies on two excerpts from the instructions. Standing alone they are erroneous on basic and controlling issues. In context with the entire instruction, they are not erroneous. We view the instructions as a whole. People v. Fred W. Thomas (1967), 7 Mich. App. 519.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Charles Jackson

Michigan Court of Appeals
Jan 27, 1970
21 Mich. App. 132 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
Case details for

People v. Charles Jackson

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE v. CHARLES JACKSON

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Jan 27, 1970

Citations

21 Mich. App. 132 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
175 N.W.2d 41

Citing Cases

People v. Penn

Although the instructions do not expressly state that there must be a conscious sharing of the criminal act,…

People v. Adams

Unless necessary to prevent manifest injustice, this Court will not consider claims of error based on alleged…