Opinion ID: 1663832
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: testimony of prior intoxication

Text: This Court has recently and unanimously reaffirmed that, except under very unusual circumstances, it will not reverse on the basis of erroneous introduction of testimony where there was neither timely objection nor request at trial for curative instruction. People v Moss, 397 Mich 69; 245 NW2d 389 (1976). The testimony regarding defendant's prior intoxication and contacts with the police entered without objection. Not only were curative instructions not requested, but the details of the matter were actively pursued by defense counsel. It would not be unfair to infer that counsel's decision in this regard was tactical. The defense was intoxication, and the testimony allowed the jury to glimpse a history of drinking problems. In any event, it does not appear that admission of the testimony resulted in a miscarriage of justice. MCLA 769.26; MSA 28.1096. See People v Robinson, 386 Mich 551, 563; 194 NW2d 709 (1972). Affirmed.