People v. James

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding waiver valid because Michigan law does not require that a defendant be informed of unanimity requirement
• stating that inquiry into the prosecution’s diligence should consider not only the steps taken to secure the witness’s presence, but also “the time at which the efforts were made”
• efforts made on the eve of trial to secure the presence of a witness who testified at the preliminary examination over three years before trial were not sufficiently reasonable to satisfy the due diligence standard
• this Court held under MRE 804 that the “prosecutor’s failure to take any action during [a recess in the trial] undermines whatever degree of good faith we might otherwise be willing to afford,” and that the efforts made by the prosecution did not demonstrate due diligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Bell
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1998-11-17· cited 93×
• People v. Leonard
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1997-10-08· cited 57×
• People v. Briseno
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1995-05-19· cited 38×
• People v. Adams
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1999-04-21· cited 24×
• People v. Watkins
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1995-02-21· cited 21×
• People of Michigan v. Donnie Everett
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 2017-01-17

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Barber v. Page
  Supreme Court· 1968-04-29· cited 1,846×
• People v. Pasley
  Michigan Supreme Court· 1984-08-20· cited 15×
• People v. James
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1990-07-02· cited 14×
• People v. Conner
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1990-03-19· cited 10×