People v. Brown
| Citation | 238 Mich. 298,212 N.W. 968 |
| Decision Date | 01 April 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 164.,164. |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. BROWN. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Michigan |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Recorder's Court of Detroit; Harry B. Keidan, Judge.
Carl Brown was convicted of breaking and entering a dwelling house in the daytime, and he brings error. Affirmed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Frederick McGraw, of Detroit, for appellant.
William W. Potter, Atty. Gen., and Robert M. Toms, Pros. Atty., and Valois E. Crossley, Asst. Pros. Atty., both of Detroit, for the People.
Defendant, on error, seeks to test the validity of the method employed by the recorder's court for the city of Detroit in impaneling a jury.
Before Hon. Thomas M. Cotter, presiding judge of the court, the case of People v. Pinckney came on for trial. The names of all the jurors being in the box, the clerk drew twelve names, and the 12 jurors were sworn on voir dire. Then Judge Cotter announced the assigning of the case of People v. Carl Brown, defendant here, to Hon. Harry B. Keidan, another judge of that court. All remaining names of jurors being in the box, the clerk, by direction of Judge Cotter, drew 12 names from the box, and the 12 jurors were sent into Judge Keidan's court-room, where, before that judge, certain jurors were challenged and excused. Again, before Judge Cotter, the required number of names as drawn from the jury box containing remaining names, and the jurors so drawn were sent into Judge Keidan's court. There being another challenge and an excusal, the process was repeated when a jury in the cause at bar before Judge Keidan was impaneled.
Defendant was present with his counsel during the entire proceeding before both judges. It is not contended that the jurors were not sworn properly.
The court has the inherent right to function, and to function efficiently. It has a like right to provide by rule and to put into practice the method of impaneling juries here employed, and, in any event, the right to make rules is conferred by statute. Section 14651, Comp. Laws of 1915. A like method of impaneling juries in judicial circuits having more than one judge is provided by the judicature act (section 12610, Comp. Laws of 1915). Whether section 12610 is applicable to trials in criminal cases, and also applicable to trials in the recorder's court (People v. Jones, 220 Mich. 633, 190 N. W. 755), are questions which need not be discussed.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- In re Parole of Hill
-
Thurston, In re
...111 S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27 [1991]; Gray v Clerk of Common Pleas Court, Mich. 588, 594; 115 N.W.2d 411 [1962]; People v. Brown, 238 Mich. 298, 300, 212 N.W. 968 (1927); Const 1963, art 6, § 1. [Unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered August 28, 1997 (Docket No. In rejecting th......
-
Mich. Neurology Assocs. v. Beall
... ... 404, 428; 827 N.W.2d ... 407 (2012). "The court has the inherent right to ... function and to function efficiently." People v ... Brown, 238 Mich. 298, 300; 212 N.W. 968 (1927). Our ... Legislature has recognized this right as well-MCL 600.611 of ... the ... ...
- Mloodysnowski v. Raniak