People v. Elauim

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Elauim

212 N.W.2d 292, 49 Mich. App. 559, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 855

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 25, 1973

DocketDocket 13299

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 212 N.W.2d 292 (People v. Elauim) 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. Elauim, 212 N.W.2d 292, 49 Mich. App. 559, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 855 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinions

V. J. Brennan, J.

Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of first-degree murder committed in the perpetration of a robbery (MCLA 750.316; MSA 28.548) and sentenced for the mandatory term of life imprisonment. Three eyewitnesses identified him as a participant in a robbery-mur[561]*561der occurring at the American Auto Parts Store in Detroit, December 9, 1970.

His sole claim on appeal is that the trial court erred in excluding a letter offered by defendant to impeach one of the eyewitnesses. It was offered as a prior inconsistent statement and was identified and acknowledged by the witness. The text of the letter was ambiguous and standing alone posed no contradiction to any of the witness’s prior testimony. The trial court gave defense counsel further opportunity to explain the letter and connect it to the testimony. This defense counsel refused to do. Defense counsel failed to establish the relevancy of the letter. On this basis the trial court’s ruling to exclude the letter was not error.

Affirmed.

O’Hara, J., concurred.

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

V. J. Brennan, J.

Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of first-degree murder committed in the perpetration of a robbery (MCLA 750.316; MSA 28.548) and sentenced for the mandatory term of life imprisonment. Three eyewitnesses identified him as a participant in a robbery-mur[561]*561der occurring at the American Auto Parts Store in Detroit, December 9, 1970.

His sole claim on appeal is that the trial court erred in excluding a letter offered by defendant to impeach one of the eyewitnesses. It was offered as a prior inconsistent statement and was identified and acknowledged by the witness. The text of the letter was ambiguous and standing alone posed no contradiction to any of the witness’s prior testimony. The trial court gave defense counsel further opportunity to explain the letter and connect it to the testimony. This defense counsel refused to do. Defense counsel failed to establish the relevancy of the letter. On this basis the trial court’s ruling to exclude the letter was not error.

Affirmed.

O’Hara, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 N.W.2d 292, 49 Mich. App. 559, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-elauim-michctapp-1973.

Opinions

V. J. Brennan, J.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack