People v. King
Decision Date | 23 November 1981 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 65247 |
Citation | 312 N.W.2d 629,412 Mich. 145 |
Parties | PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Russell Evern KING, Defendant-Appellant. 412 Mich. 145, 312 N.W.2d 629 |
Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Robert E. Weiss, Pros. Atty., and Donald A. Kuebler, Chief, Appellate Div., for the people.
Reese W. Stipes for defendant.
We address the scope of the examining magistrate's function and appellate review of that function when an appellant alleges error in the decision of the examining magistrate, because our reading of the Court of Appeals opinion in this case and People v. Oster, 67 Mich.App. 490, 241 N.W.2d 260 (1976), suggests a need to clarify our decisions.
The defendant was charged with first-degree murder for shooting Rick Stroble to death on December 30, 1978. The evidence at the preliminary examination showed that the defendant and his wife were separated and in the process of obtaining a divorce. The decedent was living with the defendant's wife and children. From midafternoon on December 29, until the early morning hours of December 30, the defendant consumed a considerable quantity of intoxicants. Around 6:30 a. m. on December 30, the defendant telephoned his wife's residence, spoke with the decedent, and made a threatening comment. The decedent taunted the defendant. Armed with a .22-caliber pistol, the defendant appeared at the door of the house 30 minutes later. The decedent attempted to block the defendant's entry into the house by leaning against the door. The defendant shot through the door, killing the decedent.
Barbara King, the defendant's daughter, stated that she had never heard the defendant threaten the decedent and never seen any problem between them. Ms. King said that the defendant was drunk and stumbling and that his talk was slurred. James King, the defendant's son, testified that while his father had threatened the deceased before, he had never taken any action; and he had never seen his father violent with the decedent. James King also acknowledged that defendant's speech was slurred and that he staggered. Larry Rushton testified that he drank with the defendant from 2 p. m. December 29 until 5:30 a. m. December 30. The defendant was driving erratically on the road and had smoked marijuana at a party.
The Kings testified that when the defendant came to the house he was acting "crazy", "weird"; no one answered the door for two or three minutes when he came; he would not have known who was holding the door, or who was behind it when he shot. Defendant's friend, Dixie Pearce, to whose home he went after the shooting, testified concerning the defendant's statements that he had gone home to get his keys to the Duck Club to which he belonged; they would not let him in; he shot through the door; and the decedent was in the way.
The examining magistrate bound the defendant over for trial on the charge of manslaughter:
The prosecutor sought review of the district judge's decision on binding over. The circuit court identified its task as a review for abuse of discretion under People v. Doss, 406 Mich. 90, 276 N.W.2d 9 (1979), and People v. Dellabonda, 265 Mich. 486, 251 N.W. 594 (1933), and affirmed. The prosecutor pursued the issue to the Court of Appeals, and that Court reversed in an unpublished per curiam opinion of May 8, 1980:
The defendant is now before this Court with an application for leave to appeal.
The examining magistrate's function is to determine whether a crime has been committed and whether there is probable cause for charging the defendant with that crime. M.C.L. § 766.13; M.S.A. § 28.931.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cardenas v. State
...cause exists to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant charged has committed it." See People v. King, 412 Mich. 145, 312 N.W.2d 629 (1981). To the extent that witnesses are presented, since the testimony adduced may later reappear at trial, the preliminary hearing......
-
People v. Goecke
...N.W.2d 148 (1994). A magistrate should not dismiss a charge merely because some of the evidence is conflicting. People v. King, 412 Mich. 145, 153-154, 312 N.W.2d 629 (1981). Even if evidence is submitted on each element of the offense, the magistrate's job is not to automatically bind over......
-
People v. Johnson
...490, 495, 241 N.W.2d 260 (1976); People v. Martinovich, 18 Mich.App. 253, 257, 170 N.W.2d 899 (1969); see also People v. King, 412 Mich. 145, 154, 312 N.W.2d 629 (1981); People v. Salazar, 124 Mich.App. 249, 252, 333 N.W.2d 567 (1983).6 The cause in Cargen had been certified to the circuit ......
-
People v. Justice
...marked by discreetness and caution to have a reasonable belief that the defendant is guilty as charged. People v. King, 412 Mich. 145, 152-153, 312 N.W.2d 629 (1981); People v. Asta, 337 Mich. 590, 60 N.W.2d 472 (1953). 14 A bindover is not a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Rath......