People v. Buck

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Buck

71 Mich. App. 28

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 24, 1976

DocketDocket No. 22677

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 71 Mich. App. 28 (People v. Buck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Buck, 71 Mich. App. 28 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On October 24, 1974, defendant was convicted of negligent homicide, contrary to MCLA 750.324; MSA 28.556, following a jury trial in Clinton County Circuit Court, Judge Leo W. Corkin presiding. Defendant was sentenced on [29]*29November 25, 1974, to a jail term of six months. He now appeals as of right.

Reversible error occurred when the court instructed under the civil rather than criminal standard for determining proximate cause. In criminal cases guilt is personal. The trial court instructed that defendant could be found guilty were the jury to determine that his conduct was "a” proximate cause of the accident rather than "the” proximate cause of the accident. The court thus used the civil standard for testing proximate cause. This was error. People v Layman, 299 Mich 141, 145, 146; 299 NW 840 (1941), People v Jeglum, 41 Mich App 247; 199 NW2d 854 (1972), People v Scott, 29 Mich App 549; 185 NW2d 576 (1971).

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

On October 24, 1974, defendant was convicted of negligent homicide, contrary to MCLA 750.324; MSA 28.556, following a jury trial in Clinton County Circuit Court, Judge Leo W. Corkin presiding. Defendant was sentenced on [29]*29November 25, 1974, to a jail term of six months. He now appeals as of right.

Reversible error occurred when the court instructed under the civil rather than criminal standard for determining proximate cause. In criminal cases guilt is personal. The trial court instructed that defendant could be found guilty were the jury to determine that his conduct was "a” proximate cause of the accident rather than "the” proximate cause of the accident. The court thus used the civil standard for testing proximate cause. This was error. People v Layman, 299 Mich 141, 145, 146; 299 NW 840 (1941), People v Jeglum, 41 Mich App 247; 199 NW2d 854 (1972), People v Scott, 29 Mich App 549; 185 NW2d 576 (1971).

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 Mich. App. 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-buck-michctapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack