Appeal from Recorder's Court of Detroit, James Del Rio, J.
Leave to appeal denied, 396 Mich .
R. M. Maher, P. J., and Bronson and T. M. Burns, JJ.
1. -- Probation Revocation -- Written Notice -- Waiver.
Absent a deliberate waiver due process requires that a probationer shall be entitled to a written copy of the charges against him which constitute a claim that he violated his probation.
2. -- Probation Violation -- Warrants -- Due Diligence -- Waiver -- Retroactivity.
A Court of Appeals decision holding that a warrant for an alleged probation violation must be executed with due diligence and that failure of the authorities to proceed with due diligence results in a waiver of the violation is effective retroactively to January 10, 1972, at which time another decision of the Court of Appeals placed probation authorities on notice that undue delay in acting on charges of probation violation would not be tolerated.
3. Judgment -- Retroactivity -- Criteria for Determination.
The three criteria for determining whether a court decision operates retroactively are: (1) the purpose of the new standard; (2) the justified reliance on the old standard; and (3) effect on the administration of Justice if the new test is applied retroactively.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Maher
Cordell E. Henry was convicted of unlawfully driving away an automobile and placed on probation. From a judgment finding him guilty of violating probation, defendant appeals by leave granted.
Defendant was placed on 3 years probation after his conviction for unlawfully driving away an automobile. While on probation, he was convicted of attempted uttering and publishing and sentenced to 2 years probation, the first 6 months to be served in the Detroit House of Corrections. Because of the second conviction, defendant was found guilty of violating probation for the first conviction and sentenced to a term of from 2 to 5 years in prison to run concurrently with the sentence imposed for attempted uttering and publishing. Defendant appeals, raising two issues of merit.
Defendant claims the trial court committed reversible error when it failed to give him a written copy of the charges constituting violation of his probation. MCLA 771.4; MSA 28.1134 provides, "hat the probationer shall be entitled to a written copy of the charges against him which constitute the claim that he violated his probation". The trial court in the present case did fail in this regard, but plaintiff ...