82 Mich. App. 195 | Mich. Ct. App. | 1978
Lead Opinion
After Remand
Defendant pled guilty to armed robbery, MCLA 750.529; MSA 28.797, and assault with intent to commit rape, MCLA 750.85; MSA 28.280. He was sentenced to terms of from 20 to 40 years for the armed robbery and from 6 to 10 years for the assault. Defendant appealed as of right from the denial of his motion to withdraw his pleas. We remanded this case to the circuit court for an evidentiary hearing in order to determine if the trial judge made a statement that could have been fairly interpreted by the defendant to be a promise of leniency that went unfulfilled. We also retained jurisdiction.
Upon remand, the circuit court found no such promise and denied the motion to withdraw the pleas.
Defendant claims that his pleas were given in exchange for the promise not to sentence him for a term of greater than 20 years. Defendant’s argument must be rejected for two reasons.
Secondly, when a defendant pleads guilty to a criminal charge and then appeals claiming that the plea was based on the defendant’s belief that he had been promised a lesser sentence than the one actually received, the Court of Appeals should not substitute its judgment for that of the circuit court where the circuit court has held an evidentiary hearing and has decided that the plea should be upheld. People v Hall, 399 Mich 288; 249 NW2d 62 (1976), People v Bolden, supra.
Affirmed.
Dissenting Opinion
(dissenting). 1 respectfully dissent.
I believe the record does support defendant’s contention and I further find that this is not a case of bad advice or mistaken impression only. The
I have a nagging doubt or a reasonable belief that the defendant’s plea was essentially coerced. I would grant the motion to set aside the plea and would remand on the original charges.