People v. Orr
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Although defendant requested it, no instruction was given the jury relative to burden of proof. This is reversible error. The situation was not met by giving an excellent instruction on presumption of innocence. Defendant is entitled to a new trial, and that being so, another matter should be considered. In the trial, counsel for defendant did not contend that his client had not been guilty of wilfulness, wantonness, and recklessness, so-called gross negligence, as distinguished from negligence, in effect, that there was no evidence to support the charge of manslaughter, but he makes that…
2Cited by34 opinions
- People v. TownesMichigan Supreme Court · 1974
- Siesseger v. PuthSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
- People v. LardieMichigan Supreme Court · 1996
- People v. DatemaMichigan Supreme Court · 1995
- People v. ScottMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.