People v. Stoll
People v. Stoll
Opinion of the Court
Pursuant to a plea bargain, defendant pled guilty to delivery of phencyclidine, MCL 335.341(l)(b); MSA 18.1070(41)(l)(b), assault with intent to commit murder, MCL 750.83; MSA 28.278, and possession of a firearm during commission of a felony, MCL 750.227b; MSA 28.424(2). The assault and firearm offenses allegedly arose out of the same transaction.
We find defendant’s arguments regarding the title-object clause, Const 1963, art 4, § 25, and double jeopardy, US Const, Am V, Const 1963, art 1, § 15, unpersuasive. See People v Gary Hughes, 85 Mich App 674; NW2d (1978), People v Walter Johnson, 85 Mich App 654; NW2d (1978).
We also find defendant’s argument regarding the trial court’s failure to explain the elements of the offense of assault with intent to commit murder to be without merit. See GCR 1963, 785.7(l)(a), Guilty Plea Cases, 395 Mich 96, 115-117; 235 NW2d 132, 139-140 (1975). Henderson v Morgan, 426 US 637; 96 S Ct 2253; 49 L Ed 2d 108 (1976), is distinguishable from this case on the facts.
Plaintiff concedes that an adequate factual basis was not elicited to establish assault with intent to
Reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.