People v. Oliver
People v. Oliver
Opinion of the Court
Defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charge of attempted kidnapping, MCL 750.349; MSA 28.581; MCL 750.92; MSA 28.287. Defendant also pled guilty to being a habitual offender. Defense counsel and the prosecutor agreed that the court could read the preliminary examination transcript, which contained sufficient evidence to establish the commission of a crime. At the plea proceeding, defendant acknowledged that the reason for his nolo contendere plea was the possibility of future litigation. The preliminary examination transcript also revealed that defendant was, at the time of the alleged offense, involved in a divorce proceeding with his wife. Defendant argues that there was no basis for accepting a nolo contendere plea, given the fact that the alleged victim of the crime was defendant’s own child. According to defendant, since the child could not commence a civil action against defendant arising out of the attempted kidnapping, there was no possible reason for the defendant to fear future litigation. Therefore, he argues, there was no basis in fact for the defendant’s entry and the court’s acceptance of a plea of nolo contendere.
This argument is without merit. We need not decide whether the child could commence a civil action against the father, since it is acknowledged that a divorce proceeding was pending between defendant and his wife. If the defendant were to
Affirmed.
Even in those cases where a divorce action has not yet been filed, the attempted kidnapping of a child can easily lead to a divorce and the defendant would still have a legitimate basis to fear the consequences of a guilty plea.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.