Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Hepner

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1938No. Docket No. 118, Calendar No. 39,778Published

1DissentPotter, J.

I agree this case should be reversed as to the defendant Roy Hepner.

The people introduced a statement said to have been made by Hepner to a stenographer at 1:45 a. m. This statement was transcribed by the stenographer and introduced in evidence. It was admitted defendant Hepner had made another statement at 1:10 a. m. the same day to the same stenographer. This statement was transcribed by the stenographer but excluded by the trial court. Defendant did not for this reason have such a fair trial as he was entitled to.

The statement introduced was competent, if at all, on the basis of an…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. TrefethenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  2. Hurd v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  3. People v. DellabondaMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Wellar v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
  5. People v. SwetlandMichigan Supreme Court · 1889

9 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