Case ID: mich-app_11/html/0656-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CITY OF DETROIT v. MORGAN.
    Criminal Law — Ordinance Violation — New Trial — Cross-Examination — Witnesses.
    A new trial must be granted to defendant, charged with violating a eity ordinance, where a review of the record shows that she was denied a fair trial because she was denied the right of ■■ cross-examination and an opportunity to produce a witness but does not establish that she was entitled to have the charge against her dismissed.
    Reference for Points in Headnote
    21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law §§ 222, 237, 333, 336.
    Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit, Traffic and Ordinance Division, Maher (Richard M.), J.
    Submitted Division 1 June 5, 1968, at Detroit.
    (Docket No. 3,567.)
    Decided June 10,1968.
    Mary Morgan was convicted of failure to surrender a dog for rabies observation in violation of an ordinance of tbe City of Detroit. Defendant appeals.
    Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
    
      Robert Reese, Corporation Counsel, and Robert D. McGlear, Assistant Corporation Counsel, for plaintiff.
    
      Jane Kerr, for defendant on appeal.
   Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals her conviction for violating an ordinance of tbe city of Detroit. A review of the record demonstrates that defendant was denied a fair trial because she was denied right of cross-examination and an opportunity to produce a witness, but the record does not establish that defendant is entitled to have the charge against her dismissed as requested by defendant on this appeal.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Quinn, P. J., and Fitzgerald and J. H. Gillis, JJ., concurred.