
    PEOPLE v. WELCH
    1. Criminal Law — Burglary-—Sentence—Cruel and Unusual Punishment — Equal Protection.
    A sentence of 7 to 10 years for an 18-year-old defendant convicted of breaking and entering is not cruel or unusual punishment and did not violate his right to the equal protection of the laws because it did not exceed the statutory maximum (MCLA § 750.110).
    2. Criminal Law — Sentence—Juvenile Records.
    Examination of juvenile records in order to impose a fair and just sentence is not prohibited.
    References for Points in Headnotes
    [1] 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law §§ 536, 582.
    [2] 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law §§ 582, 589.
    Appeal from Shiawassee, Michael Carland, J.
    Submitted Division 2 June 18, 1970, at Lansing.
    (Docket No. 8,660.)
    Decided August 4, 1970.
    William Welch was convicted of breaking and entering. Defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, Gerald M. Stevens, Prosecuting Attorney, and Raymond E. Basso, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
    
      E. Thomas Fitzgerald, for defendant on appeal.
    
      Before: Fitzgerald, P. J., and R. B. Burns and Danhof, JJ.
   Per Curiam.

The defendant was convicted by a jury of breaking and entering, MCLA § 750.110 (Stat Ann 1970 Cum Supp § 28.305). The defendant was 18 years old at the time he was sentenced to a term of 7 to 10 years in prison.

On appeal the defendant argues that the sentence was a cruel and unusual punishment and a violation of the defendant’s right to the equal protection of the laws.

The length of the sentence imposed on the defendant did not exceed the statutory maximum of ten years. “When the judge imposes a sentence within the law, his sentence is not a cruel or unusual punishment.” People v. Cook (1907), 147 Mich 127, 133.

This Court has held that a sentence within the statutory limits does not violate a defendant’s right to the equal protection of the laws. People v. O’Den (1968), 15 Mich App 10.

The defendant also contends that it was error for the trial court to quote from the juvenile record of the defendant at the time of the sentencing. This Court has held that examination of juvenile records in order to impose a fair and just sentence is not prohibited. People v. Coleman (1969), 19 Mich App 250; People v. Charles Williams (1969), 19 Mich App 544.

Affirmed.  