People v. Boyd
Michigan Supreme Court
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
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Doyle v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Griffin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.