Opinion ID: 2231823
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: impeachment by reference to the length and details of sentence

Text: As we stated above, defendant is entitled to a new trial under the rule of Falkner. However, since a new trial is required this Court will address itself to one of the other issues which might arise again at the new trial. That is, may a prosecutor impeach a witness's credibility on cross-examination by questions relating to the duration and details of prior prison sentences. A. Facts On direct, defendant did not make any statement as to the length of sentence resulting from his prior convictions to which he did testify. On cross-examination the following exchange took place between the defendant and prosecutor. Q. And where had you lived three days prior to this particular crime? A. Brighton, Michigan; Howell, Michigan. Q. What kind of institution were you living in there? A. Camp Brighton Prison Camp. Q. You had just been released from prison three days when this crime occurred, is that correct? A. Yes sir. Q. And what offense were you in prison for at the time you were released? A. Attempted felonious assault. Q. And what was your sentence, Mr. Rappuhn? A. One and a half to two years. Q. And how much time did you serve on the one and a half to two years? A. Eighteen months. Q. Now, have you ever been incarcerated in any other penal institution besides the State Prison Camp at Brighton? A. Yes, sir, I was in Michigan Training Unit, Ionia, Michigan. Q. What year was that? A. 1964. Q. And how long were you there? A. Approximately ten and a half months. Q. And for what offense were you there? A. Larceny from an auto. Q. And what was your sentence as a result of that conviction? A. One and a half to five years. Q. How much time did you serve? A. Altogether? Q. Yes. A. Approximately three years. Q. And what do you mean `altogether,' did you serve in a different way; what do you mean by that statement? A. I went back as a parole violator on attempted felonious assault. Q. You were on parole when that offense occurred, is that correct? A. Yes, sir. B. Law Former Justice, now Judge, O'HARA in People v Nelson White, 26 Mich App 35; 181 NW2d 803 (1970) considered this exact issue. In this case, on cross-examination defendant admitted that he had been convicted. The prosecution then asked: Q. And what was your sentence? Mr. Evans [defendant's counsel]: I'll object to that as being immaterial, your Honor. The Court: The sentence? Mr. Evans: Yes.