Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Redwine

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided December 10, 1976No. Docket 27365Published

1DissentD. T. Anderson, J.

I respectfully dissent. This was not the first conviction of defendant after enactment of the statute permitting indeterminate sentencing. 1927 PA 175 grants to circuit judges the basic authority to sentence but restricts the penalty so that it will not be greater *86than the penalty prescribed by law (Ch IX, § 1). MCLA 769.1; MSA 28.1072. A further limitation is placed on that general authority by Ch IX, § 8, 1927 PA 175 (MCLA 769.8; MSA 28.1080), which provides:

"When any person shall hereafter be convicted for the ñrst time of crime committed after this act takes effect * * * the court…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. TannerMichigan Supreme Court · 1972
  2. People v. LessardMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
  3. People v. UngureanMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
  4. People v. BinieckiMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
  5. In Re WeirMichigan Supreme Court · 1955

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API