People v. Blair
Opinion
Per Curiam.
Defendant appeals bis nonjury conviction and sentence for larceny in a store.
* He asserts as basis for appellate relief 2 claims, namely: the evidence introduced against him did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and his constitutional rights were yiolated when he was sentenced by a judge who had disqualified himself from trying-defendant because that.judge was convinced before the trial of defendant’s guilt and the record fails to disclose the unavailability of the trial judge for sentencing.
Appointed defense counsel, Alexander M. Des Chenes, Jr., has done a creditable job in presenting this appeal, but a review of the trial transcript discloses ample evidence, which, if believed by the trier *651 of the fact, establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Defendant raised no objection to being sentenced, by Judge Martin, who bad disqualified himself. As-pointed out in People v. McKinley (1966), 5 Mich App 230 , the right to be sentenced by the trial judge’ is a personal right, subject to waiver. That right was waived here.
Affirmed.
Lesinski, C. J., and Quinn and Moody, JJ., concurred.
* OL 1948, § 750.360 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.592).
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.