Court Opinion

ID: 9704492
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 00:37:10.414533+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:02.900023
License: Public Domain

V. J. Brennan, J.
(dissenting). I concur in that portion of Judge Kelly’s opinion dealing with the admissibility of defendant’s blood sample and the improper admission of evidence regarding speed based on the VASCAR unit.
I find reversible error in allowing Trooper Bluck to testify concerning use of the unit, given that no proper foundation was laid to demonstrate its accuracy. People v Tobey, 60 Mich App 420, 428-430; 231 NW2d 403 (1975). On the basis of this evidence, which would tend to have great influence on the jury, I am unable to say that they might not have reached a different result had this evidence been excluded.
On the other hand, I must disagree with my Brother Kelly on the law concerning the trial court’s failure to caution the jury against discussing the case among themselves. Contrary to the majority opinion, this Court has held that, although prudence would dictate that the trial judge should remind the jury not to discuss the case, his failure to do so will not require reversal absent a *562showing of prejudice. People v Haugabook, 23 Mich App 356, 358-359; 178 NW2d 556 (1970), lv den 383 Mich 801 (1970), People v McIntosh, 6 Mich App 62, 70-71; 148 NW2d 220 (1967). I find no evidence of prejudice on the record.