PEOPLE OF MI V CHARLES WILLIAM MCGUIRE JR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
October 22, 2002
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 232183
Jackson Circuit Court
LC No. 00-003401-FH
CHARLES WILLIAM MCGUIRE, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Talbot, P.J., and Whitbeck, C.J., and Gage, J.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals as of right his convictions, following a jury trial, of one count of
possession of less than twenty-five grams of cocaine, MCL 333.7403(2)(a)(v), and one count of
possession of marijuana, MCL 333.7403(2)(d).1 The trial court sentenced defendant to
concurrent terms of eighteen months to six years for the cocaine conviction and six months to
one year for the marijuana conviction. We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral
argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Officers stopped defendant’s vehicle as he pulled into the driveway of a house. After one
of the officers ordered defendant out of the vehicle and attempted to conduct a pat down,
defendant fled on foot. According to the officers, as defendant ran, they observed him take off
his jacket and throw it to the ground. The cocaine and marijuana were found in the jacket.
Defendant’s sole issue on appeal is that the prosecution presented insufficient evidence to
convict him. In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we view the evidence in the light
most favorable to the prosecutor to determine whether a rational trier of fact could find that the
essential elements of the crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. People v Johnson, 460
Mich 720, 723; 597 NW2d 73 (1999). Questions of credibility are left to the trier of fact to
resolve. People v Avant, 235 Mich App 499, 506; 597 NW2d 864 (1999). It is for the trier of
fact, not this Court, to determine what inferences can be fairly drawn from the evidence and
determine the weight accorded to those inferences. People v Hardiman, 466 Mich 417, 428; 646
NW2d 158 (2002).
1
The jury acquitted defendant of the resisting and obstructing a police officer charge.
-1-
Defendant essentially asks this Court to second-guess the jury’s credibility determination
in this case. At trial, both officers testified defendant was wearing a leather jacket. Both officers
testified that as defendant ran, he took off his jacket and threw it to the ground. The cocaine and
marijuana were found in the jacket. Defendant and his girlfriend, however, both testified
defendant was wearing a lined flannel jacket, not a leather jacket. Although the testimony was
conflicting, and even the officers’ testimony conflicted in some regards, it was for the jury to
weigh this testimony. It is clear the jury believed the officers’ testimony that defendant had been
wearing the leather jacket in which the cocaine and marijuana were found. We will not disturb
the jury’s credibility determination.
Affirmed.
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
/s/ William C. Whitbeck
/s/ Hilda R. Gage
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
