People v. Freeman, Docket No. 62285
| Decision Date | 12 July 1979 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 62285 |
| Citation | 280 N.W.2d 446,406 Mich. 514 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carl Anthony FREEMAN, Defendant-Appellee. 406 Mich. 514, 280 N.W.2d 446 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., William L. Cahalan, Pros. Atty., Edward Reilly Wilson, Principal Atty., Appeals, and Don W. Atkins, Asst. Pros. Atty., Detroit, for plaintiff-appellant.
James A. Callahan, Detroit, for defendant-appellee.
The defendant has yet to be tried in Wayne Circuit Court on charges of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and armed robbery. Before trial, the defendant filed several motions with the circuit court, two of which form the basis of the prosecutor's application for leave to appeal to this Court. Pursuant to defense motions, the circuit court ordered the complaining witness to undergo a psychiatric examination to be performed by a psychiatrist of the defendant's choosing and further ordered the discovery of any and all records relative to the treatment of the complaining witness by her personal physician. The prosecutor argues here that the granting of these motions by the circuit court constituted an abuse of discretion.
When the prosecutor initially appealed to the Court of Appeals, that Court by order reversed the circuit court's order. The defendant appealed to this Court, however, and we remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for further consideration. 402 Mich. 930 (1978). The Court of Appeals then reinstated the circuit court's order with instructions to review, In camera, the results of all psychiatric evaluations of the complaining witness to determine whether they would be admissible at the trial on the merits.
We are convinced that on the record before us the circuit court's order compelling the complaining witness to submit to a psychiatric examination and further ordering discovery of the complaining witness's past medical treatment for an alleged mental disorder constituted an abuse of discretion. A trial judge does indeed have discretion, in a criminal case, to order discovery. People v. Johnson, 356 Mich. 619, 97 N.W.2d 739 (1959); People v. Maranian, 359 Mich. 361, 102 N.W.2d 568 (1960). That discretion, however, is subject to review for abuse.
In this case, a hearing was held on the defense motions. Defense counsel argued, but did not substantiate his claims, that he was entitled to have his motions granted because the complaining witness is a "highly nervous person"; the alleged crimes had occurred more than two years before the date of the hearing; the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. VanderVliet
...recognizes the broad power of the trial court to prevent ambush and surprise through the use of discovery, People v. Freeman (After Remand ), 406 Mich. 514, 516, 280 N.W.2d 446 (1979); People v. Maranian, 359 Mich. 361, 102 N.W.2d 568 (1960); People v. Johnson, 356 Mich. 619, 97 N.W.2d 739 ......
-
People v. Taylor, Docket No. 79360
...356 Mich. 619, 97 N.W.2d 739 (1959); People v. Ranes, 58 Mich.App. 268, 227 N.W.2d 312 (1975). See also People v. Freeman (After Remand), 406 Mich. 514, 280 N.W.2d 446 (1979); People v. Borney, 110 Mich.App. 490, 313 N.W.2d 329 (1981); People v. Baskin, 145 Mich.App. 526, 378 N.W.2d 535 (19......
-
People v. Shahideh
...the trial court's decision to grant or deny a defendant's request for a psychological evaluation. See People v. Freeman (After Remand), 406 Mich. 514, 516, 280 N.W.2d 446 (1979); People v. Graham, 173 Mich. App. 473, 477, 434 N.W.2d 165 Defendant's sole claim on appeal is that the trial cou......
-
People v. Lemcool
...N.W.2d 623 (1970); People v. Pearson, 404 Mich. 698, 731, 273 N.W.2d 856 (1979) (opinion of LEVIN, J.); People v. Freeman (After Remand ), 406 Mich. 514, 516, 280 N.W.2d 446 (1979). However, panels of the Court of Appeals have reached differing conclusions with regard to whether the prosecu......