Legal Opinion

People v. Smith

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1998No. 103833, Calendar No. 4PublishedCited by 77 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWeaver, J.

We granted leave in this case to determine whether a hearsay statement, made approximately ten hours after an event, was properly admitted under MRE 803(2) as an excited utterance. Further, we address whether defendant was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney was charged with a felony pending in the same county. We hold that the hearsay statement was admissible as an excited utterance and that defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel. The defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.

i

The complainant was a sixteen-year-old high school sophomore…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. People v. GintherMichigan Supreme Court · 1973
  4. People v. PickensMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  5. People v. BahodaMichigan Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by77 opinions

  1. People v. DouglasMichigan Supreme Court · 2014
  2. People v. SabinMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  3. People v. MahoneMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Maurice Whiting v. Sherry Burt, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  5. People v. McLaughlinMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003

72 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