From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hart

Michigan Court of Appeals
Mar 4, 1988
427 N.W.2d 557 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

Docket No. 86747.

Decided March 4, 1988.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Louis J. Caruso, Solicitor General, William F. Delhey, Prosecuting Attorney, and Marilyn A. Eisenbraun, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

Douglas R. Mulkoff, for defendant on appeal.

Before: SAWYER, P.J., and McDONALD and H.J. SZYMANSKI, JJ.

Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.


AFTER REMAND


In our previous opinion in this case, reported at 161 Mich. App. 630; 411 N.W.2d 803 (1987), we remanded the case to the trial court, directing it to apply the standard of Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; 106 S Ct 1712; 90 L Ed 2d 69 (1986), to defendant's equal protection claim regarding the alleged intentional exclusion of black veniremen by the prosecution.

On remand and following a hearing on the issue, the trial court ruled that defendant failed to make out a prima facie case of discrimination as required by Batson, supra. We find sufficient record support for the trial court's findings and, therefore, find no abuse of discretion.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Hart

Michigan Court of Appeals
Mar 4, 1988
427 N.W.2d 557 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

People v. Hart

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE v HART (AFTER REMAND)

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Mar 4, 1988

Citations

427 N.W.2d 557 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988)
427 N.W.2d 557

Citing Cases

People v. Turner

An aider and abettor's state of mind may be inferred from all the facts and circumstances. People v Hart, 161…

Harville v. State Plumbing and Heating Inc.

We review trial court rulings regarding Batson challenges for an abuse of discretion. People v Hart (After…