TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Ervin Thomas

People v. Thomas, 226 N.W.2d 734 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided
January 27, 1975
Docket
Nos. 18495, 18496
Judges
Burns, Bronson, Cavanagh
Citations
226 N.W.2d 73458 Mich. App. 91975 Mich. App. LEXIS 1659
Cited by 5 1 descriptions by later courts

Opinion — Burns

*10 R. B. Burns, P. J.

Defendant, 16 years old, was charged with armed robbery, MCLA 750.529; MSA 28.797, and breaking and entering an occupied dwelling, MCLA 750.110; MSA 28.305. He pled guilty to the reduced charges of felonious assault, MCLA 750.82; MSA 28.277 and attempted breaking and entering, MCLA 750.92; MSA 28:287.

Defendant raises five grounds in his appeal. Only one ground merits discussion. The other grounds are deemed waived, abandoned or are not substantiated by the record.

Is a juvenile who is convicted of a crime entitled to credit for time spent in juvenile detention facilities?

The defendant was given credit for 43 days spent in the Wayne County jail. He was not given credit for any time spent in the juvenile detention facility.

MCLA 769.11b; MSA 28.1083(2), reads as follows:

"Whenever any person is hereafter convicted of any crime within this state and has served any time in jail prior to sentencing because of being denied or unable to furnish bond for the offense of which he is convicted, the trial court in imposing sentence shall specifically grant credit against the sentence for such time served in jail prior to sentencing.”

We have no precedent for this particular situation in Michigan. However, in People v Gravlin, 52 Mich App 467; 217 NW2d 404 (1974), the Court stated on page 469:

"This statutory provision is remedial and should be liberally construed * * * .

"A 'jail’ means a place of confinement and a mental hospital is such a place.”

We think a juvenile detention facility is such a *11 place and the defendant should receive credit for time spent in such an institution.

Defendant has failed to submit any record showing that he spent any time in a juvenile detention center. However, from the facts of the case, it may be conjectured that he might have spent time at the facility.

These cases are remanded to the trial court for a determination and computation of time spent by the defendant in juvenile detention in connection with these cases.

If the trial court determines that the defendant was confined in the juvenile detention facility as a result of these cases, the trial judge shall credit such time to the defendant’s benefit.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1979: 11983: 11984: 11997: 11998: 119792026peak 1979 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. People v. Stange283 N.W.2d 806 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979)
  2. People v. Lyons564 N.W.2d 114 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997)
  3. Escobedo v. Oleisky339 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 1983)
  4. People v. Chamberlain358 N.W.2d 572 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984)
  5. Adcock v. State710 So. 2d 938 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)

Most recent

  1. Adcock v. State710 So. 2d 938 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998)
  2. People v. Lyons564 N.W.2d 114 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997)
  3. People v. Chamberlain358 N.W.2d 572 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984)
  4. Escobedo v. Oleisky339 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 1983)
  5. People v. Stange283 N.W.2d 806 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979)

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.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
People v. Gravlin, 217 N.W.2d 404 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974) 17

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list