People v. Albert
Decision Date | 02 April 1979 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 77-4082 |
Citation | 89 Mich.App. 350,280 N.W.2d 523 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Keith D. ALBERT, Defendant-Appellant. 89 Mich.App. 350, 280 N.W.2d 523 |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
[89 MICHAPP 351] Josephson & Fink, by Sally Claire Fink, Ann Arbor, for defendant-appellant.
[89 MICHAPP 350] Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., William F. Delhey, Pros. Atty., James S. Sexsmith, Asst. Pros. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before V. J. BRENNAN, P. J., and KELLY and HOEHN, * JJ.
Defendant, Keith D. Albert, was charged with the armed robbery of Edward Nicholas, Jr., in violation of MCL § 750.529; MSA § 28.797. On August 18, 1977, following a jury trial defendant was found guilty as charged. On September 9, 1977, defendant was sentenced to 15 months to 5 years in prison, with credit for 27 days already spent in jail. Defendant appeals as of right.
Defendant raises four issues the first of which warrants reversal.
The case involved misconduct by a police officer in destroying a tape-recorded statement of a prosecution witness, which admittedly was beneficial to the defendant. It was the prosecution's theory that the armed robbery which occurred at Putnam Hall on the Eastern Michigan University campus was perpetrated by Thornton Logan, Willy Franks and Christopher Hayes. The defendant, being an accomplice, drove the perpetrators to the building, showed an escape route and drove the get-away car.
The defendant testified that he took the various individuals to the Putnam dormitory in order to buy marijuana so as to keep Logan's mind off criminal activity.
Logan testified on behalf of the prosecution as part of a plea bargain wherein he was allowed to plead guilty to the lesser charge of assault with intent to commit robbery while armed. Logan [89 MICHAPP 352] testified to defendant's direct involvement in the crime.
During Logan's cross-examination it was disclosed that on February 3, 1976, 21/2 weeks after the robbery, he was arrested and made a taped confession to Sergeant Garland of the Eastern Michigan University Police Department. This statement described the events of the evening in question but did not implicate defendant as a participant in the robbery. On February 5, 1976, a second statement was made by Logan and taped by Sergeant Garland wherein the defendant was implicated.
The first tape-recorded confession was "discarded" by Sergeant Garland. It is the destruction of this statement and its unavailability at trial which defendant claims warrant reversal.
This Court in People v. Amison, 70 Mich.App. 70, 245 N.W.2d 405 (1976), detailed the impact of loss of evidence through actions of the police or prosecutor. The following quote from People v. Amison, supra, pp. 79-80, 245 N.W.2d pp. 409, 410, represents a concise articulation of Michigan law on point:
The pertinent inquiry in the present case is whether the action of Sergeant Garland in "discarding" the tape-recorded confession was performed in bad faith or for the purpose of destroying evidence for a forthcoming trial. People v. Kelson, 71 Mich.App. 410, 248 N.W.2d 564 (1976); People v. Hardaway, supra. Our inquiry need go no further than the following colloquy between the defense attorney and Sergeant Garland:
Mr. Pitts: "Q: Sure. He (Logan) indicated something about a previous tape or previous statement, correct?
Sgt. Garland: "A: Correct.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Oliver
...after a defense request, it is a pertinent factor where suppression precedes a request. Amison was followed in People v. Albert, 89 Mich.App. 350, 280 N.W.2d 523 (1979), where bad faith was found to exist. There, however, the police officer frankly admitted that he destroyed a tape of a pro......
-
People v. Adams, Docket Nos. 202665
...of evidence or a showing of bad faith. People v. Johnson, 197 Mich.App. 362, 365, 494 N.W.2d 873 (1992); People v. Albert, 89 Mich.App. 350, 352-353, 280 N.W.2d 523 (1979). Defendants have not shown from the testimony generated during the evidentiary hearing that the police or the prosecuti......
-
People v. Petrella
...destroyed the notes in bad faith or intending to deprive the defendant of evidence, this Court would reverse. People v. Albert, 89 Mich.App. 350, 280 N.W.2d 523 (1979). However, not [124 MICHAPP 753] every failure to keep these notes requires reversal. People v. Fiorini (On Rehearing ), 59 ......
-
People v. Cress
...in May 1992 deeply disturbing. An inference of the prosecutor's bad faith arises under these circumstances.25People v. Albert, 89 Mich.App. 350, 354, 280 N.W.2d 523 (1979). We are aware, however, that the prosecutor contests that the evidence was destroyed in bad faith and that on the basis......