From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Charles Thomas

Michigan Court of Appeals
Dec 19, 1968
165 N.W.2d 891 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968)

Opinion

Docket No. 3,344.

Decided December 19, 1968. Leave to appeal denied August 26, 1969. 382 Mich. 779.

Appeal from Oakland, Holland (H. Russell), J. Submitted Division 2 April 3, 1968, at Lansing. (Docket No. 3,344.) Decided December 19, 1968. Leave to appeal denied August 26, 1969. 382 Mich. 779.

Charles Thomas was convicted of armed robbery and conspiracy to commit armed robbery. Robert L. Sharon was convicted of conspiracy to commit armed robbery. Defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, S. Jerome Bronson, Prosecuting Attorney, Dennis Donohue, Chief Appellate Counsel, and Bruce T. Leitman, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

Richard P. Condit, for defendants.


Defendants Thomas and Sharon were arrested pursuant to a properly issued warrant and were charged with armed robbery (CLS 1961, § 750.529 [Stat Ann 1968 Cum Supp § 28.797]) and conspiracy to commit armed robbery (CLS 1961, § 750.505 [Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.773]). Thomas was convicted on both counts. Sharon was convicted of the conspiracy charge only.

Defendants, on appeal, have failed to demonstrate that their period of detention, prior to arraignment and trial, resulted in prejudice to their case. See People v. Hamilton (1966), 359 Mich. 410; People v. Nawrocki (1967), 6 Mich. App. 46. This court, after a careful review of the record, finds that no reversible error occurred in the preliminary proceedings (see People v. Willis, 1 Mich. App. 428), nor in the closing argument or charge to the jury.

At the same time we are not persuaded, as argued here, that the entry of certain evidence and exhibits was error, where defense counsel elicited the very testimony now complained of and agreed to admission of the exhibit. Finally, we hold that the interests of these defendants were not in conflict and, therefore, no prejudice resulted from their joint representation by retained counsel.

Affirmed.

LESINSKI, C.J., and T.G. KAVANAGH and FOLEY, JJ., concurred.


Summaries of

People v. Charles Thomas

Michigan Court of Appeals
Dec 19, 1968
165 N.W.2d 891 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968)
Case details for

People v. Charles Thomas

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE v. CHARLES THOMAS PEOPLE v. SHARON

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Dec 19, 1968

Citations

165 N.W.2d 891 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968)
165 N.W.2d 891

Citing Cases

People v. Hilton

Joint representation of codefendants becomes improper only when the interests of one defendant so conflict…

People v. Dockery

The few Michigan cases in point subscribe to this view and require some prejudice to the defendant. In People…