People v. Wood

Michigan Court of Appeals

People v. Wood

171 N.W.2d 43, 18 Mich. App. 311, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1064

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 28, 1969

DocketDocket No. 4,505

StatusPublished

This text of 171 N.W.2d 43 (People v. Wood) 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. Wood, 171 N.W.2d 43, 18 Mich. App. 311, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1064 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendants were tried and convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice in connection with violations of the State gambling laws.

They appeal on the ground that they were deprived of a fair and impartial trial because of press reports of comments by the trial judge criticizing the Michigan Supreme Court for releasing on bail during the pendency of his appeal to that Court of a person who had been convicted of contempt of a one-man grand jury.

After a careful examination of the three jurors who had heard or read the press reports as to whether their feelings and decision would be prejudiced by the comments, the trial judge found that the jurors were not prejudiced by the comments made to the news media by the judge, and he found no connection between that ease and the case at bar. We find no basis for reaching a different conclusion and are persuaded that the defendants were not deprived of a fair and impartial trial. See People v. Jenkins (1968), 10 Mich App 257, 261, 262; People v. Pearson (1968), 13 Mich App 371; People v. Freeman (1969), 16 Mich App 63; People v. Bloom (1969), 15 Mich App 463, 467-474; Irvin v. Dowd (1961), 366 US 717 (81 S Ct 1639, 6 L Ed 2d 751).

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendants were tried and convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice in connection with violations of the State gambling laws.

They appeal on the ground that they were deprived of a fair and impartial trial because of press reports of comments by the trial judge criticizing the Michigan Supreme Court for releasing on bail during the pendency of his appeal to that Court of a person who had been convicted of contempt of a one-man grand jury.

After a careful examination of the three jurors who had heard or read the press reports as to whether their feelings and decision would be prejudiced by the comments, the trial judge found that the jurors were not prejudiced by the comments made to the news media by the judge, and he found no connection between that ease and the case at bar. We find no basis for reaching a different conclusion and are persuaded that the defendants were not deprived of a fair and impartial trial. See People v. Jenkins (1968), 10 Mich App 257, 261, 262; People v. Pearson (1968), 13 Mich App 371; People v. Freeman (1969), 16 Mich App 63; People v. Bloom (1969), 15 Mich App 463, 467-474; Irvin v. Dowd (1961), 366 US 717 (81 S Ct 1639, 6 L Ed 2d 751).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 N.W.2d 43, 18 Mich. App. 311, 1969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wood-michctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack