102 Mich. App. 336 | Mich. Ct. App. | 1980
Defendant was convicted by a jury of the crime of attempting to procure an act of gross indecency. MCL 750.338; MSA 28.570. The alleged criminal conduct consisted of approaching a security guard in a rest room at Grand Rapids Junior College and offering to perform certain sexual acts with him. The dispositive issue on appeal is whether defendant can be convicted of attempting to procure an act of gross indecency under the facts of this case. We hold that he cannot.
We are in agreement with Judge Bronson’s dissent in the recent decision of People v Masten, 96 Mich App 127; 292 NW2d 171 (1980), in which he construed the term "procure” as encompassing only the acquisition of something on behalf of another and not for oneself. In the instant case, since defendant was attempting to initiate sexual activity between himself and another person, his actions would not constitute procuring or attempting to procure an act of gross indecency.
The conduct of defendant would more properly be classified as an act of solicitation. MCL 750.448; MSA 28.703. We construe the solicitation statute
Accordingly, defendant’s conviction for the crime of attempting to procure an act of gross indecency must be reversed. The prosecution failed to show that defendant attempted to facilitate sexual activity between two other individuals.
Since our resolution of this issue completely disposes of this case, we need not discuss defendant’s other claims of error.
Reversed.