People v. Bufkin, Docket No. 8317
Citation | 48 Mich. App. 290,210 N.W.2d 390 |
Decision Date | 23 July 1973 |
Docket Number | 8408.,Docket No. 8317 |
Parties | PEOPLE v. BUFKIN PEOPLE v. CARTER |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan (US) |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski Solicitor General, William L. Cahalan, Prosecuting Attorney, Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Department, and Michael R. Mueller, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.
Burton L. Borden, for defendant Bufkin on appeal.
Kenneth R. Teschendorf (M. Gerald Schwartzbach, of counsel), for defendant Carter on appeal.
Before: LESINSKI, C.J., and V.J. BRENNAN and O'HARA,* JJ.
(ON REHEARING)
Leave to appeal granted as to Carter, 390 Mich ___.
This case is before us on rehearing by our grant thereof. The facts and original decisional holding are to be found at 43 Mich App 585; 204 NW2d 762 (1972).
The prosecuting attorney takes particular exception to the following language in the initial opinion:
(Emphasis supplied.) People v Bufkin, 43 Mich App at 589; 204 NW2d at 763.
To this language the prosecution in part replies:
We do not agree that such is the case, unless the information is a one-count felony-murder charge. We know of no constitutional provision, statute, or case precedent that precludes the people from including a second count for that degree of homicide which the people feel the facts support. Before the case is submitted to the jury the people may elect whether to go to the jury on the felony-murder count alone or on both counts where the proofs adduced support such submission. Contrariwise the defense is entitled to move the court to compel an election or dismiss either count unsupported by proofs.
We held as we did in order to eliminate the confusion that of necessity arises where the case goes to the jury on a felony-murder count and where the trial judge charges on second-degree murder and manslaughter. It is under such a charge that incongruous and compromise verdicts can result.
We point out that because of the clear language of the statute, the only charge to be given the jury ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Woods
...Court [sic; Court of Appeals] finally came down with a decision on it. People v. Bumpkin & Carter [ sic; People v. Bufkin (On Rehearing), 48 Mich.App. 290, 210 N.W.2d 390 (1973) ]. This was a felony and I told them the same thing I told this jury. If they rejected the theory of the prosecut......
-
People v. McIntosh
...of the felony-murder charge. We do not agree with People v. Bufkin, 43 Mich.App. 585, 204 N.W.2d 762 (1972); People v. Bufkin (On Rehearing), 48 Mich.App. 290, 210 N.W.2d 390 (1973), and think the better rule is that stated in People v. Wimbush, 45 Mich.App. 42, 205 N.W.2d 890 (1973); Peopl......
-
People v. Trudeau
...acquittal of all higher offenses. Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 78 S.Ct. 221, 2 L.Ed.2d 199 (1957); People v. Bufkin (On Rehearing), 48 Mich.App. 290; 210 N.W.2d 390 (1973), does not interfere with the prosecutorial charging decision. It holds that if a jury-submissible case of felo......
-
People v. Livingston
...murder is the only offense involved. See People v. Bufkin, 43 Mich.App. 585, 204 N.W.2d 762 (1972), aff'd on rehearing, 48 Mich.App. 290, 210 N.W.2d 390 (1973); People v. Graves, 52 Mich.App. 326, 217 N.W.2d 78 (1974). The request for an instruction on lesser included offenses was rightly D......