People v. Burks
| Decision Date | 01 January 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 6,6 |
| Citation | 196 N.W.2d 777,387 Mich. 393 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry Clay BURKS, Defendant-Appellant. , |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
State Appellate Defender Office by Arthur J. Tarnow, State Appellate Defender, Detroit, for defendant-appellant.
William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Dominick R. Carnovale, Chief, Appellate Dept., Thomas P. Smith, Asst. Pros. Atty., Detroit, for plaintiff-appellee.
Before the Entire Bench.
I agree with Justice Black and the Court of Appeals as to the first question.
I disagree with the rigid statement by the Court of Appeals, 30 Mich.App. 102, 186 N.W.2d 18, that 'the character of the deceased in a homicide prosecution in material Only when a plea of self-defense is interposed.' (Emphasis added)
A proper statement of the evidentiary rule appears in 40 C.J.S. Homicide § 222, p. 1138, 1140:
'Aside from the situation where there is a claim of self-defense and some evidence in support thereof * * * the violent, turbulent, and dangerous character of deceased may be shown when from the circumstances of the case it is a part of the res gestae, or it is relevant to illustrate the circumstances attending the homicide * * * or there is evidence of threats by deceased against accused, or when the evidence of the homicide is wholly circumstantial, or where the immediate circumstances of the killing render it doubtful whether the act was justifiable or not, or leave the question of the intention of accused in committing the crime doubtful or the proof evenly balanced, or indicate provocation on the part of deceased.'
The crucial question in this case was which man had the gun--the defendant or the deceased. It was uncontested that deceased was involved in at least one fight and that he had previously purchased a gun. If the deceased had the gun, the trial testimony would have backed up the defense theory that the deceased shot himself. To show that he would be likely to draw a gun in a fight would not combat the testimony that defendant had the gun.
I agree with the ruling of the trial judge that no foundation was laid for the introduction of testimony pertaining to the deceased's character and consequently vote to affirm.
BLACK, Justice (for affirmance).
Nothing submitted on review of this case, either in the briefs or by the factually uncertain oral arguments...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burks v. Egeler
...v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 83 S.Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed.2d 770 (1963). 1 People v. Burks, 30 Mich.App. 102, 186 N.W.2d 18 (1971); People v. Burks, 387 Mich. 393, 196 N.W.2d 777 (1972).2 The eight claimed violations were:1. The selection of jurors violated petitioner's rights to a fair trial.2. There wa......
-
Com. v. Benoit
...other courts. See, e.g., People v. Foster, 81 Ill.App.3d 915, 923-924, 37 Ill.Dec. 128, 401 N.E.2d 1221 (1980); People v. Burks, 387 Mich. 393, 395, 196 N.W.2d 777 (1972). Based on the short time in which we have had experience with the application of the Adjutant rule, and the lack of oppo......
-
People v. Anderson
...with a verdict of guilty of felony murder, would have made conviction of a lesser offense more likely. In People v. Burks, 387 Mich. 393, 395, 196 N.W.2d 777 (1972), the Supreme Court stated that evidence of the deceased's character may be admissible even if the accused does not interpose a......