People v. Dennis
| Decision Date | 19 October 1983 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 63777 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Linda DENNIS, Defendant-Appellant. 128 Mich.App. 235, 340 N.W.2d 81 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
[128 MICHAPP 236] Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Caruso, Sol. Gen., Robert E. Weiss, Pros. Atty., and Donald A. Kuebler, Chief Asst. Pros. Atty., for the people.
Philip J. Olson, II, Flint, for defendant-appellant.
Before DANHOF, C.J., and V.J. BRENNAN and BAGULEY, * JJ.
After a jury trial, the defendant was found guilty as charged of inciting the commission of first-degree murder, M.C.L. Sec. 750.157b; M.S.A. Sec. 28.354(2). Defendant was sentenced to a mandatory term of life imprisonment. Defendant appeals as of right.
[128 MICHAPP 237] Defendant was accused of inciting another to murder her husband. The primary evidence against the defendant was a tape recorded conversation between the defendant and a Detective Christman, while Christman was posing as a professional "hit man" named "Moose". Defendant was introduced to "Moose" by Jack Reno, a frequent customer of the defendant's tropical fish store. Reno testified that the defendant had approached him while he was in the defendant's store and had inquired whether he knew anyone who "eliminated" people. Reno subsequently arranged a meeting between "Moose" and the defendant. In her defense, defendant testified that Reno had extorted money from her and had forced her to make the incriminating taped statements.
Defendant raises five claims of error, only two of which we find merit discussion.
Defendant's first claim is that the prosecutor's failure to establish that the incitement was likely to endanger human life requires the reversal of the defendant's conviction. Defendant maintains that because Detective Christman was a police officer, actual incitement, inducement or exhortation was not possible and it was impossible for the murder to actually occur. Therefore, the defendant contends, the statutory requirement that the defendant's incitement endanger or be likely to endanger human life cannot be satisfied and, at most, the record could only support a conviction for "attempted incitement, inducement, or exhortation".
M.C.L. Sec. 750.157b; M.S.A. Sec. 28.354(2), provides:
"Any person who incites, induces or exhorts any other person to unlawfully burn any property, to murder, to kill, to wound or to commit an aggravated or felonious assault on any person or to do any act which [128 MICHAPP 238] would constitute a felony or circuit court misdemeanor, that may endanger or be likely to endanger the life of any person or who aids and abets in any such inciting, inducing or exhorting shall be punished in the same manner as if he had committed the offense, incited, inducement or exhorted."
We find that the fact that Detective Christman could not actually be incited or induced to commit the crime because he was a police officer is irrelevant. The statute requires only that the defendant seek to induce, incite or exhort the commission of one of the specified offenses. The possibility of success is immaterial because it is not an element of the offense of inciting another to commit murder. Thus, the defendant's first claim is without merit.
Defendant also claims that the Legislature did not intend to punish the inducement of another to murder by a mandatory term of life imprisonment.
Where a statute is subject to two different interpretations, the Legislature's intent may be found by looking to the purposes and objectives sought to be accomplished by the legislation. Bennetts v. State Employees Retirement Board, 95 Mich.App. 616, 622, 291 N.W.2d 147 (1980). If, however, the words of a statute are clear and unambiguous, judicial construction based on an analysis of legislative intent is neither required nor permitted. Perry v. Sturdevant Mfg. Co., 124 Mich.App. 11, 15, 333 N.W.2d 366 (1983), citing Dussia v. Monroe County Employees Retirement System, 386 Mich. 244, 248-249, 191 N.W.2d 307 (1971).
In Michigan Harness Horseman's Ass'n v. Racing Comm'r, 123 Mich.App. 388, 391, 333 N.W.2d 292 (1983), this Court stated:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Owens
...is not required. People v. Shafou, 416 Mich. 113, 122, 330 N.W.2d 647 (1982), (opinion of Justice Fitzgerald), People v. Dennis, 128 Mich.App. 235, 340 N.W.2d 81 (1983). And finally, based on my resolution of the foregoing issues, I vote to affirm revocation of defendant's probation. * Thom......
-
People v. Salazar
...not be incited, in fact, defendant was not guilty of the crime charged. This issue was addressed by this Court in People v. Dennis, 128 Mich.App. 235, 340 N.W.2d 81 (1983). In Dennis, the defendant approached an undercover detective who was posing as a professional "hit man" to arrange for ......
-
People v. Shelson
...to that held by panels of this Court in People v. Salazar, 140 Mich.App. 137, 143, 362 N.W.2d 913 (1985), and in People v. Dennis, 128 Mich.App. 235, 340 N.W.2d 81 (1983), rev'd 422 Mich. 967, 374 N.W.2d 419 In this case, defendant was bound over to circuit court on a charge of inciting her......
-
People v. Dennis
...DENNIS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 72757. 422 Mich. 967, 374 N.W.2d 419 Supreme Court of Michigan. Sept. 18, 1985. Prior Report: 128 Mich.App. 235, 340 N.W.2d 81. ORDER By order of March 28, 1984, the delayed application in propria persona for leave to appeal was held in abeyance pending the ......