PEOPLE OF MI V DAVID BRYANT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
December 26, 2000
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 216580
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 97-009527
DAVID BRYANT,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Bandstra, C.J., and Fitzgerald and D. B. Leiber*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Defendant appeals as of right from convictions of armed robbery, MCL 750.529; MSA
28.797, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, MCL 750.227b; MSA
28.424(2), following a bench trial. He was sentenced to three to fifteen years for the robbery
conviction, to be served consecutively to the two-year mandatory sentence for felony-firearm.
We affirm.
In reviewing a nonjury criminal case, this Court “is required to review the entire record to
determine whether the trial judge clearly erred.” People v Rush, 48 Mich App 478, 482; 210
NW2d 467 (1973). This Court must review the record to determine whether there was sufficient
evidence to warrant a verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. People v Garcia, 398 Mich
250, 263; 247 NW2d 547 (1976). The trial court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error.
A finding of fact is considered “clearly erroneous if, after a review of the entire record, the
appellate court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” People
v Gistover, 189 Mich App 44, 46; 472 NW2d 27 (1991).
Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence as it relates to the elements
of the crimes charged. He contends only that the trial court erred in finding that he was the
person who committed the crimes. The fact that the trial court chose to find the complainant
credible despite defense counsel’s efforts to impeach him does not constitute clear error. People
v Snell, 118 Mich App 750, 755; 325 NW2d 563 (1982). Because there was evidence to support
the trial court’s finding that the complainant was credible, we defer to the trial court’s resolution
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1-
of the issue of identity. People v Cartwright, 454 Mich 550, 555; 563 NW2d 208 (1997); People
v Martin, 199 Mich App 124, 125; 501 NW2d 198 (1993).
We affirm.
/s/ Richard A. Bandstra
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
/s/ Dennis B. Leiber
-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.
