
    PEOPLE v GRAY
    Criminal Law—Plea of Guilty—Privilege—Self-Incrimination— Advice of Rights.
    Failure to advise a defendant before accepting his plea of guilty that he has a constitutional privilege against self-incrimination will invalidate the plea (US Const, Am V).
    Reference for Points in Headnote
    21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law §§ 357, 367, 449.
    Appeal from St. Clair, Stanley C. Schlee, J.
    Submitted Division 2 January 5, 1972, at Lansing.
    (Docket No. 11188.)
    Decided May 1, 1972.
    Frederick H. Gray was convicted, on his plea of guilty, of breaking and entering an unoccupied dwelling. Defendant appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    
      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Walter W. Turton, Prosecuting Attorney, Peter Deegan, Chief Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, and Delmer L. Cleland, Corporation Counsel, for the pepple.
    
      Jane Burgess, Assistant State Appellate Defender, for defendant.
    Before: Lesinski, C. J., and McGregor and Quinn, JJ.
   Per Curiam.

Defendant Gray was convicted on his plea of guilty of breaking and entering an unoccupied dwelling. MCLA 750.110; MSA 28.305. He appeals as of right.

Before accepting defendant’s plea of guilty, the trial court failed to inform him of his Federal constitutional privilege against self-incrimination secured by the Fifth Amendment.

Failure of the trial court to advise the defendant of this right so as to effect a waiver thereof by his plea of guilty makes this plea infirm. See Boykin v Alabama, 395 US 238; 89 S Ct 1709; 23 L Ed 2d 274 (1969); People v Jaworski, 387 Mich 21 (1972).

We need not reach the other issue raised by defendant in view of our finding above.

Reversed and remanded.  