From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Beverly Haywood

Michigan Court of Appeals
Oct 26, 1970
27 Mich. App. 365 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)

Opinion

Docket No. 8,288.

Decided October 26, 1970.

Appeal from Genesee, Elza H. Papp, J. Submitted Division 2 July 28, 1970, at Detroit. (Docket No. 8,288.) Decided October 26, 1970.

Beverly Haywood was convicted, on her plea of guilty, of uttering and publishing a forged check. Defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Donald F. Leonard, Prosecuting Attorney, and Donald A. Kuebler, Chief Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

Allen J. Nelson, for defendant on appeal.

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


Defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of uttering and publishing a forged check, MCLA § 750.249 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.446). She appeals contending that the trial court improperly accepted the guilty plea.

She was sentenced to serve 4-1/2 to 14 years in the Detroit House of Correction.

The statute under which appellant was convicted requires knowledge that the instrument "uttered and published" was "false, altered, forged or counterfeit." While it is not required that before the court may accept a plea of guilty every element of the offense be directly established, it is required that the court obtain a reasonable ascertainment of the truth of the plea. People v. Bartlett (1969), 17 Mich. App. 205. Defendant stated, in response to the court's questioning, that when she received the check the writing purporting to be the endorsement of the payee was already inscribed on the back of the check. This being so, the defendant could just as well have been a dupe for the man who asked her to cash it for him as a participant in the offense. We think a fair reading of the court's rule-required examination is susceptible of either interpretation. Under these circumstances, we feel constrained to reverse and remand for a new trial.


Summaries of

People v. Beverly Haywood

Michigan Court of Appeals
Oct 26, 1970
27 Mich. App. 365 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
Case details for

People v. Beverly Haywood

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE v. BEVERLY HAYWOOD

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 26, 1970

Citations

27 Mich. App. 365 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
183 N.W.2d 399

Citing Cases

People v. Haack

7 guilty-plea convictions on the authority of Barrows for failure to establish a factual basis. See, e.g.,…

People v. Elston

It is not required that before the court may accept a plea of guilty every element of the offense be directly…