People v. Stickney
The People v. Charles A. Stickney
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
Information for embezzlement. The respondent pleaded guilty. The judge receiving the plea examined the respondent to ascertain whether the plea was voluntary, but the examination was in the presence of the officers of the court and other persons. Sentence having been passed— Blanchard & Cagwin for respondent, to the point that this examination was not sufficient, referred to Public Acts of 1875 p. 140; Edwards v. People 39 Mich. 760 ; Clark v. People 44 Mich. 308 .
Attorney-General Jacob J. Van Riper concurred in this view, and
The Court ordered the judgment reversed and the respondent discharged.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.