People v. Mitchell
Michigan Court of Appeals
1DissentO’Hara, J.
It seems to me there is an irreconcilable ■ conflict between Michigan Supreme Court precedent which has both implicitly and explicitly excused the prosecution from calling an accomplice, though an eyewitness, and the obligation of the people to call all eyewitnesses to a given transaction unless the number is so great as to make the testimony merely cumulative. In the present case, Michael McGuire was an eyewitness and also an accomplice.
Thus it appears that on the one hand the prosecution was obligated to endorse McGuire as a res gestae witness and call him to the stand so that he would be…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. Virgil BrownMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
- People v. Leroy MorganMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
- People v. MooreMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
- People v. ChaneyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
- People v. ToneffMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.