Court Opinion

ID: 9732788
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 16:35:34.891081+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:33.944444
License: Public Domain

R. B. Burns, P. J.
(dissenting). Defendant was convicted by a jury of one count of assault with intent to commit the crime of gross indecency, MCLA 750.85; MSA 28.280, and one count of rape, MCLA 750.520; MSA 28.788.
I would reverse.
At the close of the direct examination of the complainant the following exchange took place:
”Q. (By Mr. Babcock): Now, Gail, in this 30 hour ordeal, did Mr. Jack ever mention anything to you about what he did for a living?
"A. He said he steals for his girl friend, Miss Hodge.
"Mr. O’Connell: Your Honor, we ask for a mistrial.
"The Court: The jury is instructed to disregard the last question and answer as being totally immaterial as to what the issue is at hand and the mistrial is denied.”
In People v Greenway, 365 Mich 547, 549; 114 NW2d 188, 190 (1962), the witness Carter was asked, " 'Where did you meet William Greenway?’ ” Carter answered, " 'In the Arkansas prison’ ”. On page 551; 190-191, the Court stated:
"The answer by Carter, which the prosecution clearly anticipated or hoped for, was calculated to prejudice the minds of the jurors against the defendant. Thus, he was deprived of a fair trial and, to that extent, due process.”
*641See People v White, 38 Mich App 651; 197 NW2d 121 (1972), Cachola v The Kroger Company, 32 Mich App 557; 189 NW2d 112 (1971), People v Milkovich, 31 Mich App 582; 188 NW2d 124 (1971), People v Matthews, 17 Mich App 48; 169 NW2d 138 (1969).
Chief Justice T. G. Kavanagh, while sitting on this Court, stated in People v Camel, 11 Mich App 219, 222-223; 160 NW2d 790, 791 (1968):
"In view of the prior testimony at the Walker hearing, the objectionable response by this witness could have been anticipated. Since the trial judge is charged with the ultimate duty to control the proceedings before him, and since he as well as the prosecutor failed to protect the defendant, when the damage was done by this testimony the court should have granted the motion for mistrial.”
I would reverse and remand for a new trial.