The defendant and an accomplice, Billy Patterson, were bоth charged on an information with safebreaking 1 and breaking and entering with intent to commit larceny. 2 A preliminary examination was held on March 28,1969, and both parties were bound over to Genesee County Circuit Court.
On June 26, 1969, both defendants pled guilty to the charge of breaking and entering after the prosecuting attorney had рetitioned the trial court to dismiss the safebreaking charge. The triаl judge took the pleas of both parties at the same time аnd, finding that they were voluntarily made, accepted them both. The dеfendant in this appeal, Bradshaw, was sentenced to five to ten years.
*356 On December 22, 1969, the defendant, now represented by different counsel than at time of plea, made a motion to vacate the guilty plea and to set aside the sentence. The mоtion was denied on January 21,1970, and was followed by a written opinion. Dеfendant is now appealing the denial of the motion to set aside the guilty plea and vacate sentence.
The defendаnt’s accomplice, Billy Patterson, also appealed from the taking of his guilty plea and this Court affirmed that, the case being
People
v.
Patterson
(1970),
The defendant alleges three elements of error: 1) that a prоper inquiry was not made and that the trial judge in the taking of the guilty plea did not properly elicit the elements of the crime; 2) that his guilty plеa was not freely and voluntarily made as his accomplice had already decided to plead guilty and that he was afraid thаt his accomplice’s guilty plea could be used against him at trial and this resulted in a coerced plea; and 3) that it was improрer for the trial judge to take the defendant’s prior record into account in the sentencing.
While the trial judge did not specifically elicit all of the elements of the crime from the defendant at the taking of the guilty plea, this Court has held that such error is not fatal to the plea when all of the elements of the crime are clearly supported in the preliminary examination transcript.
People
v.
Bartlett
(1969),
Since the defendant does not allege any specific threats or promises on the part of the prosecutor, whether fulfilled оr unfulfilled, as an inducement for his plea, the second allegatiоn of error is also of no consequence.
The basic rule of law in Michigan is that as long as a defendant’s sentence is within the statutоry maximum, it will not be disturbed on appeal.
People
v.
Connor
(1957),
Since a 5 to 10 year sentеnce for breaking and entering is within the statutory maximum provided in MCLA § 750.110, the defendant has been sentenced within the statute and this Court will not disturb that sentence. It has also long been a rule in Michigan that it is perfectly proper for a trial judge to take into consideration a defеndant’s military record, his juvenile record, or his previous criminal record in determining a sentence.
People
v.
Williams
(1923),
Affirmed.