Case ID: mich-app_59/html/0654-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PEOPLE v KOEHLER (SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION)
    Witnesses — Res Gestae Witnesses — Failure to Indorse — Failure to Produce — Evidentiary Hearing — Evidence—Cumulative Testimony.
    Failure to indorse and produce a res gestae witness does not entitle a defendant to a new trial where it is found at an evidentiary hearing that the testimony of that witness would be cumulative and not different in any material respect from the testimony adduced at trial.
    Reference for Points in Headnote
    58 Am Jur, Witnesses § 111.
    Appeal from Berrien, Julian Hughes, J.
    Submitted Division 3 June 3, 1974, at Lansing.
    (Docket No. 16756.)
    Decided August 12, 1974,
    54 Mich App 624; 221 NW2d 398.
    Supplemental opinion decided March 13, 1975.
    Michael D. Koehler was convicted of delivery of heroin and delivery of LSD. Defendant appealed, and the case was remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
    Affirmed.
    
      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and John Smietanka, Prosecuting Attorney (Prosecuting Attorneys Appellate Service, Howard C Marderosian, Acting Director, of counsel), for the people.
    
      Judith K. Munger and Jessica R. Cooper, Assistants State Appellate Defender, for defendant.
    Before: McGregor, P. J., and R. B. Burns and O’Hara, JJ.__
    
      
       Former Supreme Court Justice, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Const 1963, art 6, § 23 as amended in 1968.
    
   Per Curiam.

Upon order of this Court, the instant matter was remanded to Berrien County Circuit Court for an evidentiary hearing, to determine whether or not Mrs. Stevens’ testimony would have been cumulative, had she been available to testify at trial. 54 Mich App 624; 221 NW2d 398 (1974).

Mrs. Stevens was produced at the required evidentiary hearing on September 30, 1974, and the judge concluded that her testimony was cumulative and did not differ in any material respect from that adduced at trial.

A new trial was not ordered. The transcripts and findings have been duly filed as well as a supplemental brief on behalf of the defendant,

The findings of the trial court are supported by the record.

Defendant’s conviction is affirmed.