People v. Rhinehardt

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Rhinehardt

506 N.W.2d 1, 201 Mich. App. 1

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 20, 1993

DocketDocket No. 131615

StatusPublished

This text of 506 N.W.2d 1 (People v. Rhinehardt) 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. Rhinehardt, 506 N.W.2d 1, 201 Mich. App. 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, MCL 750.84; MSA 28.279, and assault, MCL 750.81; MSA 28.276. Defendant appeals as of right. We reverse and remand.

Defendant claims that reversal is required because the prosecutor intentionally violated his right to a fair trial by introducing a rebuttal witness after both parties had rested and completed their closing arguments. We agree. Such an error is so offensive to the maintenance of a sound judicial process that it can never be regarded as harmless. People v Robinson, 386 Mich 551, 563; 194 NW2d 709 (1972). We therefore reverse defendant’s convictions and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.

In light of our resolution of this case, we need not address defendant’s remaining arguments.

Reversed and remanded. We do not retain jurisdiction.

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

Per Curiam.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, MCL 750.84; MSA 28.279, and assault, MCL 750.81; MSA 28.276. Defendant appeals as of right. We reverse and remand.

Defendant claims that reversal is required because the prosecutor intentionally violated his right to a fair trial by introducing a rebuttal witness after both parties had rested and completed their closing arguments. We agree. Such an error is so offensive to the maintenance of a sound judicial process that it can never be regarded as harmless. People v Robinson, 386 Mich 551, 563; 194 NW2d 709 (1972). We therefore reverse defendant’s convictions and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.

In light of our resolution of this case, we need not address defendant’s remaining arguments.

Reversed and remanded. We do not retain jurisdiction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

506 N.W.2d 1, 201 Mich. App. 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rhinehardt-michctapp-1993.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack