PER CURIAM.
Defendants were convicted by a jury of arson, CL 1948, § 750.73 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.268), and were sentenced. They prosecute this appeal as a matter of right.
The first of two questions raised on appeal concerns the failure of the prosecution to endorse the names of two alleged eyewitnesses to the crime as required by statute. CLS 1961, § 767.40 (Stat Ann 1965 Cum Supp § 28.980). Certain facts must be noted in connection...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
