Cargando…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); Michigan Supreme Court; 481 Mich. 451. Datos: https://static.case.law/mich/481/cases/0451-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
People v. Blackston, 481 Mich. 451 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008) CORRIGAN, J. At issue in this case is whether defendant is entitled to a new trial on the basis of his argument that two unavailable witnesses’ written recantations were improperly excluded from defendant’s second trial. A transcript of the witnesses’ testimony from the first trial was admitted as evidence at the second trial and defendant sought to admit the recanting statements for purposes of impeachment. The Van Burén Circuit Court denied defendant’s motion to introduce the statements. The court also denied defendant’s motion for a new trial, in which defendant argued that the statements were improperly excluded. The Court of Appeals reversed and ordered a new trial. We conclude that defendant is not entitled to a new trial because the trial court acted within its discretion when it excluded the recantations and denied defendant’s motion for a new trial. Further, any error that may have occurred was harmless. Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals judgment and remand to that court for consideration of any remaining issues advanced by defendant in his claim of appeal. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS IN THE CIRCUIT COURT In 2001 and 2002, juries twice convicted defendant, Junior Fred Blackston, for the first-degree murder of Charles Miller. In 1988, Miller was executed and buried in a field near defendant’s home in Allegan County. Miller’s disappearance remained unsolved until codefendant Charles Lamp ultimately…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); Michigan Supreme Court; 481 Mich. 451. Datos: https://static.case.law/mich/481/cases/0451-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
People v. Blackston, 481 Mich. 451 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008) CORRIGAN, J. At issue in this case is whether defendant is entitled to a new trial on the basis of his argument that two unavailable witnesses’ written recantations were improperly excluded from defendant’s second trial. A transcript of the witnesses’ testimony from the first trial was admitted as evidence at the second trial and defendant sought to admit the recanting statements for purposes of impeachment. The Van Burén Circuit Court denied defendant’s motion to introduce the statements. The court also denied defendant’s motion for a new trial, in which defendant argued that the statements were improperly excluded. The Court of Appeals reversed and ordered a new trial. We conclude that defendant is not entitled to a new trial because the trial court acted within its discretion when it excluded the recantations and denied defendant’s motion for a new trial. Further, any error that may have occurred was harmless. Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals judgment and remand to that court for consideration of any remaining issues advanced by defendant in his claim of appeal. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS IN THE CIRCUIT COURT In 2001 and 2002, juries twice convicted defendant, Junior Fred Blackston, for the first-degree murder of Charles Miller. In 1988, Miller was executed and buried in a field near defendant’s home in Allegan County. Miller’s disappearance remained unsolved until codefendant Charles Lamp ultimately…