Michigan Court of Appeals· 5/5/1999

People v. Murray

Citations

593 N.W.2d 690
234 Mich. App. 46

How courts have described this case

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

holding that testimony about a general procedure for drug transactions and that the packaging of drugs found indicated an intent to sell was permissible drug profile evidence
holding that testimony about a general procedure for buying and selling drugs and that the quantity and packaging of drugs found indicated an intent to distribute was permissible expert testimony
noting “the danger that [police officer expert] testimony may have an aura of special reliability and trustworthiness”
noting “the danger that [police officer expert] testimony may have an aura of special reliability and trustworthiness”
finding an -7- impermissible link of an innocuous drug profile characteristic to the defendant where an officer stated that the defendant’s address was one of “certain areas within the city that are more prevalent or open dealing of drugs occur”
“[B]ecause the focus is primarily on the jury’s use of the profile, courts must make clear what is and what is not an appropriate use of the profile evidence. Thus, it is usually necessary for the court to instruct the jury with regard to the proper and limited use of profile testimony.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: White, P.J., and Markman and Young, Jr

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.