Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Burton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided August 25, 1989No. 82216, (Calendar No. 6)Published

1DissentBoyle, J.

The majority errs in hold*306ing that the complainant’s statements to the police officer were inadmissible under the excited utterance exception because there was no independent evidence of a forcible criminal sexual assault.

The requirement of forced sexual relations, bruising, signs of force, ripped or torn undergarments, or other witness corroboration, as proof that something out of the ordinary occurred evokes the long discredited notion that a person must be injured in order to be a rape victim. The issue is not whether there was "independent” evidence of a startling event. Properly…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. United States v. MatlockSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. People v. HamptonMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Richardson v. GreenTexas Supreme Court · 1984

24 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