People v. Weeks
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo. (Buck, J.) ^Respondent was convicted of being a disorderly person, under Act No. 264, Laws of 1889, and required to enter into a recognizance for his good behavior, and pay one-half the costs of prosecution. The-facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
Three objections are raised to the convictiom in this case;
1. The case was adjourned by the justice from December 30 to January 6, and from January 6 to January 10, against the objection of the defendant. These adjournments were. *88had by reason of the inability of the prosecuting attorney to attend at those dates, which fact was communicated by the prosecuting attorney to the justice by letter and by telephone. The adjournments were proper, and did not operate to the prejudice of the defendant, as he was out on bail. People v. Shufelt, 61 Mich. 237.
2. The defendant, who was charged with being…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. SteeleMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- People v. ShufeltMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
3Cited by7 opinions
- Attorney General Ex Rel. O'Hara v. MontgomeryMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- People v. MulierMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
- People v. HendersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- People v. WashburnMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
- People v. EdwardsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.