People v. Andrews, Docket No. 77-4899
Decision Date | 16 January 1979 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 77-4899 |
Citation | 276 N.W.2d 867,88 Mich.App. 115 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnny Mack ANDREWS, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Leonard Townsend, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Edward R. Wilson, App. Chief Asst. Pros. Atty., Larry Roberts, Asst. Pros. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before CAVANAGH, P. J., and D. E. HOLBROOK, Jr. and KAUFMAN, JJ.
On November 14, 1977, defendant was jury-convicted of first-degree murder, M.C.L. § 750.316; M.S.A. § 28.548, in connection with the January 30, 1977, robbery of a restaurant in which an employee was shot and killed. Defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment and appeals as of right.
At trial the defense was alibi. Defendant did not take the stand, but his girlfriend, Carolyn Ferguson, testified that defendant was with her in Cleveland at the time the crime was committed. Then on the cross-examination of Ferguson, the following occurred:
In closing argument, the prosecutor again referred to unemployment:
Michigan Courts have on several occasions deplored prosecutorial references to defendant's unemployment or poverty. 1 Apparently, however, prosecutors are not getting the message: Whether defendant or his girlfriend for that matter was poor or unemployed is legally irrelevant to the issue of guilt or innocence. This Court refuses to "assume that wealth exerts a greater attraction on the poor than on the rich". 2 To do so would "effectively establish a two-tiered standard of justice and demolish Pro tanto the presumption of innocence". 3 Our system of justice and its constitutional guarantees are simply too fragile to permit this type of unfounded character assassination. As stated in People v. Henderson, 80 Mich.App. 447, 454, 264 N.W.2d 22, 25-26 (1978):
The questioning and argument in the case at bar cannot be excused as inadvertent, as unobjected to, as invited by defense counsel, or as "fleeting references" in a hotly contested trial. 4 Here the prosecutor specifically stated that he was introducing the subject of unemployment to show motive, and the trial court overruled defense counsel's timely objections to the testimony and argument. We must reverse defendant's conviction and remand for a new trial. 5 "Unless we enforce the rules we encourage their violation * * * ", People v. Farrar, 36 Mich.App. 294, 299, 193 N.W.2d 363, 366 (1971).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
1 See, E. g., in addition to cases cited Infra, People v. Johnson, 393 Mich. 488, 496-499, 227 N.W.2d 523 (1975); People v. Hammond, 394 Mich. 627, 232 N.W.2d 174 (1975); People v. Osborne, 75 Mich.App. 600, 256 N.W.2d 45 (1977), Lv. den. 402 Mich. 810 (1977), and People v. Leverette, 84 Mich.App. 268, 269 N.W.2d 559 (1978). Cf. People v. Jackson, 77 Mich.App. 392, 258 N.W.2d 89 (1977), Lv. den. 402 Mich. 830 (1977).
3 People v. Green, 74 Mich.App. 601, 606, 254 N.W.2d 788, 790 (1977), Rem'd 401 Mich. 802 (1977), Op. on remand ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Williams
...a particular offense, see, e.g., People v. Johnson, 393 Mich. 488, 496-497, 227 N.W.2d 523 (1975); People v. Andrews, [143 MICHAPP 586] 88 Mich.App. 115, 118, 276 N.W.2d 867 (1979), lv. den. 411 Mich. 921 (1981), the fact that a person hates or dislikes a particular race of people does not ......
-
Smoot v. Woods
...combined with defense counsel's own introduction of the subject at trial rendered trial unfair and unreliable); People v. Andrews, 276 N.W 2d 867 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979) (reversal required where prosecutor improperly elicited testimony regarding defendant's unemployment as evidence of motive ......
-
People v. Henderson
...Mich.App. 700, 708, 254 N.W.2d 619 (1977); People v. Jones, 73 Mich.App. 107, 109, 251 N.W.2d 264 (1976). But, cf. People v. Andrews, 88 Mich.App. 115, 276 N.W.2d 867 (1979).11 See, e. g., People v. Andrews, supra, p. 118, 276 N.W.2d p. 868 ("Michigan courts have on several occasions deplor......
-
Knoedler v. State
...so broad a distinction, although it is interesting to note that two of the three cases relied on by the Court ( People v. Andrews, 88 Mich.App. 115, 276 N.W.2d 867 (1979), and State v. Stewart, 162 N.J.Super. 96, 392 A.2d 234 (App.Div.1978)) involved violent crimes. 2 Whether or not a disti......