People v. Jendrzejewski

63 Citing cases

  1. People v. McBride

    No. 360446 (Mich. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2023)

    "The general rule is that the defendant must exhaust his peremptory challenges to preserve a jury selection question." People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich. 495, 514 n 19; 566 N.W.2d 530 (1997). Alternatively, "when a party refuses to express satisfaction with the jury empaneled, the issue is preserved for appeal."

  2. People v. Shaver

    No. 305944 (Mich. Ct. App. Sep. 12, 2013)

    We review for an abuse of discretion a trial court's decision to grant or deny a motion for change of venue. People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). "A trial court abuses its discretion when its decision falls outside the range of reasonable and principled outcomes."

  3. People v. Willis

    No. 344561 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 26, 2019)   Cited 1 times

    "The right to a jury trial guarantees to the criminally accused a fair trial by a panel of impartial indifferent jurors." People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 501; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). "The existence of pretrial publicity, standing alone, does not necessitate a change of venue."

  4. People v. Clay

    No. 339659 (Mich. Ct. App. Jan. 8, 2019)

    "An exception to the rule provides that the court may, in special circumstances where justice demands or statute provides, change venue to another county." People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 499-500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). Sometimes, "it may be appropriate to change the venue of a criminal trial when widespread media coverage and community interest have led to actual prejudice against the defendant."

  5. People v. Abuelazam

    No. 311936 (Mich. Ct. App. Jun. 10, 2014)

    We review a trial court's decision to deny a motion to change venue for an abuse of discretion. People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). "A trial court abuses its discretion when its decision falls outside the range of reasonable and principled outcomes."

  6. People v. Houthoofd

    487 Mich. 568 (Mich. 2010)   Cited 57 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Houthoofd, the defendant was tried in Saginaw County, which on appeal was determined not to be the proper county for purposes of venue.

    "[E]xcept as the legislature for the furtherance of justice has otherwise provided reasonably and within the requirements of due process, the trial should be by a jury of the county or city where the offense was committed."People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495; 499; 566 NW2d 530 (1997).People v Lee, 334 Mich 217, 226; 54 NW2d 305 (1952).

  7. People v. Davidson

    No. 332032 (Mich. Ct. App. May. 9, 2017)

    "It is the general rule that defendants must be tried in the county where the crime is committed. An exception to the rule provides that the court may, in special circumstances where justice demands or statute provides, change venue to another county." People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 499-500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). "[T]he right to jury trial guarantees to the criminally accused a fair trial by a panel of impartial, indifferent jurors.

  8. People v. Steel

    No. 318561 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 26, 2015)

    We review a trial court's decision on a motion to change venue for an abuse of discretion. People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). An abuse of discretion occurs when a trial court's decision falls outside the range of principled outcomes.

  9. People v. Galvan

    No. 299814 (Mich. Ct. App. Sep. 24, 2013)

    An order denying a change of venue is reviewed for a clear and palpable abuse of discretion. People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). Pretrial publicity, by itself, will not justify a change of venue.

  10. People v. Rodriguez

    No. 307317 (Mich. Ct. App. Jul. 18, 2013)   Cited 2 times

    We review the trial court's decision for an abuse of discretion. People v Jendrzejewski, 455 Mich 495, 500; 566 NW2d 530 (1997). A trial court abuses its discretion when it selects an outcome that is outside the range of reasonable and principled outcomes.