TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Sacharczyk

People v. Sacharczyk, 168 N.W.2d 639 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided
April 21, 1969
Docket
No. 3,219
Judges
McGregor, P.J., and R.B. Burns and Danhof
Citations
168 N.W.2d 63916 Mich. App. 7101969 Mich. App. LEXIS 1477
Cited by 5

Opinion

16 Mich. App. 710 (1969) 168 N.W.2d 639

PEOPLE

v.

SACHARCZYK Docket No. 3,219.

Michigan Court of Appeals.

Decided April 21, 1969. Rehearing denied May 19, 1969. Leave to appeal denied December 24, 1969.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, James T. Corden, *711 Prosecuting Attorney, and Walter W. Turton, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

Philip A. Gillis, for defendant.

BEFORE: McGREGOR, P.J., and R.B. BURNS and DANHOF, JJ.

Leave to appeal denied December 24, 1969. See 383 Mich 755 .

PER CURIAM:

Defendant appeals his jury conviction for resisting a police officer in discharge of his duty. MCLA § 750.479 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.747). At trial, after the defense rested, the prosecution, over defendant's objection, called two unindorsed res gestae witnesses in rebuttal. The allowance of their testimony was reversible error. The witnesses had not appeared before. Furthermore, no attempt had been made to indorse the witnesses and no legal cause explaining the prosecution's failure to indorse is evident in the record. See MCLA § 767.40 (Stat Ann 1969 Cum Supp § 28.980); People v. Honenberg (1936), 274 Mich 698 ; People v. Rose (1934), 268 Mich 529 ; People v. Rimson (1966), 3 Mich App 713 . Finally, the rebutting testimony was improper, since it tended to prove surrounding circumstances of the crime. People v. Rose, supra, 540 .

Our ruling above makes unnecessary either an enlargement of the facts or a dissection of other issues.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1970: 11971: 21975: 219702026peak 1971 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. People v. Parker237 N.W.2d 572 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975)
  2. People v. Tocco230 N.W.2d 341 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975)
  3. People v. Coleman188 N.W.2d 632 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971)
  4. People v. Barbara179 N.W.2d 105 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)
  5. People v. Insley194 N.W.2d 20 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971)

Most recent

  1. People v. Parker237 N.W.2d 572 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975)
  2. People v. Tocco230 N.W.2d 341 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975)
  3. People v. Insley194 N.W.2d 20 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971)
  4. People v. Coleman188 N.W.2d 632 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971)
  5. People v. Barbara179 N.W.2d 105 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
People v. Rose, 256 N.W. 536 (Mich. 1934) 47
People v. Rimson, 143 N.W.2d 587 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966) 13
People v. Hanenberg, 265 N.W. 506 (Mich. 1936) 12

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list