PEOPLE OF MI V JAMES ALFRED WESLOCK
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
December 28, 1999
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 214990
Muskegon Circuit Court
LC No. 98-041952 FH
JAMES ALFRED WESLOCK,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Saad, P.J., and McDonald and Gage, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals as of right from his convictions of felonious assault, MCL 750.82; MSA
28.277, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, MCL 750.227b; MSA
28.424(2), entered after a bench trial. We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument
pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
At trial complainant, defendant’s wife, testified that defendant pointed a gun at her after she told
him to leave the marital home. Complainant stated that the gun made her fear for her life. A police
officer testified that defendant told him that he intended to frighten complainant with the gun. Defendant
testified that he carried the gun for his own protection because he feared that complainant might bring
other persons home to assault him, and because complainant was extremely upset.
The trial court found defendant guilty of felonious assault and felony-firearm. The court found
complainant’s testimony to be more credible than that given by defendant.
When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a bench trial, we view the
evidence presented in a light most favorable to the prosecution, and determine whether a rational trier of
fact could find that the essential elements of the crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The
trier of fact may make reasonable inferences from evidence in the record, but may not make inferences
completely unsupported by any direct or circumstantial evidence. People v Petrella, 424 Mich 221,
268-270, 275; 380 NW2d 11 (1985); People v Vaughn, 186 Mich App 376, 379-380; 465 NW2d
365 (1990).
-1
In a bench trial, the court must make findings of fact and state separately its conclusions of law.
MCR 6.403. Findings are sufficient if it appears that the court was aware of the issues and correctly
applied the law. People v Smith, 211 Mich App 233, 235; 535 NW2d 248 (1995). We review a
trial court’s findings of fact for clear error. MCR 2.613(C); People v Hermiz, 235 Mich App 248,
255; 597 NW2d 218 (1999).
The trial court found defendant guilty of felonious assault and felony-firearm. The elements of
felonious assault are: (1) an assault; (2) with a dangerous weapon; and (3) with the intent to injure or
place the victim in reasonable apprehension of an immediate battery. People v Avant, 235 Mich App
499, 504; ___ NW2d ___ (1999). The elements of felony-firearm are: (1) the defendant possessed a
firearm; (2) during the commission of, or the attempt to commit, a felony. People v Davis, 216 Mich
App 47, 53; 549 NW2d 1 (1996).
Defendant argues that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to support his convictions.
We disagree and affirm. The undisputed evidence showed that defendant carried a firearm during the
incident. The trial court was entitled to find that complainant’s testimony to the effect that defendant
pointed the gun at her was more credible than defendant’s testimony in which he denied doing so.
Marji, supra. Complainant’s testimony that she feared for her life when defendant pointed the gun at
her and caused it to make a clicking sound supported the trial court’s finding that defendant committed
an assault. People v Grant, 211 Mich App 200, 202; 535 NW2d 581 (1995). Viewed in a light
most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence was sufficient to support both the conviction of
felonious assault and the conviction of felony-firearm. Avant, supra; Davis, supra; MCR 2.613(C).
Affirmed.
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Gary R. McDonald
/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.