From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hughes

Michigan Court of Appeals
Nov 26, 1969
20 Mich. App. 294 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)

Opinion

Docket No. 6,535.

Decided November 26, 1969.

Appeal from Livingston, Michael Carland, J. Submitted Division 2 November 4, 1969, at Lansing. (Docket No. 6,535.) Decided November 26, 1969.

George Edward Hughes was convicted of indecent liberties. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

John R. Brennan, for defendant.

Before: J.H. GILLIS, P.J., and McGREGOR and V.J. BRENNAN, JJ.


Defendant was convicted by the court of committing indecent liberties with a child (MCLA § 750.336, Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.568). The sole issue raised by defendant on appeal is whether the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Examination of the record discloses that there was sufficient proof presented by the people to establish the guilt of the defendant. While defendant's testimony contradicted that of the complainant, the trial court as the trier of fact had an opportunity to examine the demeanor of the witnesses as they testified and could properly consider their interest or lack of interest in the outcome of the case in evaluating their testimony. The underlying issue is credibility, which is an issue confided for resolution to the trier of fact and not to us. See People v. Szymanski (1948), 321 Mich. 248, 253; People v. Doris White (1965), 2 Mich. App. 104, 106; People v. Ritzema (1966), 3 Mich. App. 637; and People v. Wheeler (1967), 7 Mich. App. 576.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Hughes

Michigan Court of Appeals
Nov 26, 1969
20 Mich. App. 294 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)
Case details for

People v. Hughes

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE v. HUGHES

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Nov 26, 1969

Citations

20 Mich. App. 294 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)
174 N.W.2d 81

Citing Cases

People v. Tooks

And the trier of fact may properly consider the interest or lack of interest on the part of a witness in…

People v. Bailey

This credibility determination was entirely within the trial court's discretion to make as the finder of fact…