Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Allen

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 1988No. Docket Nos. 70740, 71633, 72346, 72753, 73297, (Calendar Nos. 1-5)Published

1DissentRiley, C.J.

I disagree with the majority’s adoption of the "bright-line” rule contained in revised MRE 609(a). I share the concerns and criticisms expressed by Justice Boyle and concur in parts i, ii, hi, and iv of her dissent.

Furthermore, in granting leave in People v Allen, People v Pedrin, and People v Smith,1 we directed the parties to include among the issues to be briefed whether this Court should adopt the rule announced in Luce v United States, 469 US 38; 105 S Ct 460; 83 L Ed 2d 443 (1984), that to preserve for appellate review a claim of improper impeachment with a prior conviction, a defendant…

2Cases cited54 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Luce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Steagald v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. People v. JacksonMichigan Supreme Court · 1974

49 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