People v. Fredericks

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Fredericks

198 N.W.2d 895, 40 Mich. App. 425, 1972 Mich. App. LEXIS 1236

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 1, 1972

DocketDocket No. 11544

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 198 N.W.2d 895 (People v. Fredericks) 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. Fredericks, 198 N.W.2d 895, 40 Mich. App. 425, 1972 Mich. App. LEXIS 1236 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Supplemental Opinion on Remand from the Supreme Court.

Per Curiam.

Pursuant to the March 3, 1972, order of remand from the Supreme Court, we have considered our decision in this case in the light of People v Martin, 386 Mich 407 (1971), and People v Stevens, 386 Mich 579 (decided February 25, 1972). We affirm our prior opinion.

As we read Martin and Stevens, supra, a psychiatrist is proscribed from testifying at trial concerning facts gleaned from the defendant relating to the latter’s guilt, but a psychiatrist may testify to facts learned from and concerning the defendant which are themselves material to the case. We do not find in the record testimony of the psychiatrist that is proscribed by Martin and Stevens, supra. We do find testimony of the psychiatrist as to facts learned from and concerning defendant which the psychiatrist said he needed in formulating his opinion as to defendant’s sanity. The latter facts were also related by defendant from the witness stand prior to the testimony of the psychiatrist.

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

Supplemental Opinion on Remand from the Supreme Court.

Per Curiam.

Pursuant to the March 3, 1972, order of remand from the Supreme Court, we have considered our decision in this case in the light of People v Martin, 386 Mich 407 (1971), and People v Stevens, 386 Mich 579 (decided February 25, 1972). We affirm our prior opinion.

As we read Martin and Stevens, supra, a psychiatrist is proscribed from testifying at trial concerning facts gleaned from the defendant relating to the latter’s guilt, but a psychiatrist may testify to facts learned from and concerning the defendant which are themselves material to the case. We do not find in the record testimony of the psychiatrist that is proscribed by Martin and Stevens, supra. We do find testimony of the psychiatrist as to facts learned from and concerning defendant which the psychiatrist said he needed in formulating his opinion as to defendant’s sanity. The latter facts were also related by defendant from the witness stand prior to the testimony of the psychiatrist.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 N.W.2d 895, 40 Mich. App. 425, 1972 Mich. App. LEXIS 1236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fredericks-michctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack