Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Boyd

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 2004No. Docket 118021Published

1DissentKelly, J.

I would not extend the ruling in Luce v United States1 and People v Finley1 2 to this case. I find that the trial court’s error here was plain enough to require reversal, despite defendant’s decision not to testify. Therefore, I would reverse the Court of Appeals decision and remand this case for a new trial.

THE MAJORITY MISCHARACTERIZES FINLEY

Finley does not stand for anything more than a specific application of Luce. It holds that, to preserve a claim of error concerning improper impeachment by prior convictions under MRE 609, a defendant must testify. Although Justices BOYLE and GRIFFIN…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. Doyle v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API