People v. Cuyler

196 N.W.2d 870, 38 Mich. App. 490, 1972 Mich. App. LEXIS 1675
Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided February 23, 1972·No. Docket No. 10685·Published

Opinions

R. B. Burns, P. J.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of assault with intent to rape. MCLA 750.85; MSA 28.280'.

Defendant’s objection to the use of testimony from a preliminary examination transcript is without merit. The record shows an exercise of due diligence and a good faith effort by the prosecutorial authorities to obtain trial attendance of the missing witness. Barber v Page, 390 US 719; 88 S Ct 1318; 20 L Ed 2d 255 (1968); People v Nieto, 33 Mich App 535 (1971).

In fact, the missing witness was discovered the evening of the trial. Although proofs had been closed neither side had presented their final arguments to the jury when the prosecutor informed de[492] fense counsel that the missing witness was in the courtroom and offered the defense, the opportunity to cross-examine the witness. The offer was denied.

Affirmed.

T. M. Burns, J., concurred.

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

People v. Cuyler, 196 N.W.2d 870, 38 Mich. App. 490, 1972 Mich. App. LEXIS 1675 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972).

196 N.W.2d 870 (People v. Cuyler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barber v. Page
390 U.S. 719 (Supreme Court, 1968)
People v. Carter
312 P.2d 665 (California Supreme Court, 1957)
People v. Tees
192 N.W.2d 241 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1971)
People v. McIntosh
191 N.W.2d 749 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1971)
People v. Nieto
190 N.W.2d 579 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1971)
People v. Quick
25 N.W. 302 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1885)
People v. Harper
108 N.W. 689 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1906)