No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PEOPLE
v.
DURHAM
v.
DURHAM
Docket No. 8,490.
Michigan Court of Appeals.
Jun 3, 1970.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, William L. Gahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Department, and Arthur N. Bishop, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people., Armcmd D. Bove, for defendant on appeal.
Bronson, McGregor, Quinn.
Published
Per Curiam.
By his plea of guilty, defendant was convicted of attempted sale of a narcotic drug in violation of MCLA § 335.152 (Stat Arm 1957 Rev § 18.1122) and MCLA § 750.92 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.287). He appealed as of right. The people have filed a motion to affirm the conviction. GCR 1963, 817.5(3).
On appeal, defendant contends that the lower court failed to examine him sufficiently to establish the[*359] crime and his participation therein. See People v. Barrows (1959), 358 Mich 267, 272 and People v. Perine (1967), 7 Mich App 292.
Our review of the record satisfies us that the court’s examination of defendant was sufficient.
Motion to affirm is granted.