L.B. LINDEMER, J.
Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of prison escape. MCLA 750.193; MSA 28.390. The Court of Appeals reversed defendant's conviction, and we affirm on the same basis as People v Luther, ante, 394 Mich. 619; 232 N.W.2d 184 (1975).
In this case the defendant testified to a similar confrontation to the one noted in Luther. We discuss only one factual variation; defendant did not leave the prison until approximately 24 hours after the confrontation. This does not suffice to remove the defense of duress from the consideration of the jury.
The opinion of the Court of Appeals sets forth the facts in sufficient detail. People v Harmon, 53 Mich. App. 482, 484-485; 220 N.W.2d 212, 213-214 (1974).
"[W]hat constitutes present, immediate and impending compulsion depends on the circumstances of each case."
People v Richter, 54 Mich. App. 598; 221 N.W.2d 429 (1974). (In that case the time lapse was three weeks.)
The trial court's refusal to give an instruction on duress was reversibly erroneous.
The Court of Appeals is affirmed. Defendant's cross-appeal is moot.
T.G. KAVANAGH, C.J., and WILLIAMS, LEVIN, M.S. COLEMAN, and J.W. FITZGERALD, JJ., concurred with LINDEMER, J.
SWAINSON, J., took no part in the decision of this case.