From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hardy

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
Nov 26, 2019
No. 339236 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2019)

Opinion

No. 339236

11-26-2019

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AMANDA JENISE HARDY, Defendant-Appellant.


If this opinion indicates that it is "FOR PUBLICATION," it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports. UNPUBLISHED Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 17-002020-01-FH Before: O'BRIEN, P.J., and BECKERING and LETICA, JJ. LETICA, J. (concurring).

I concur in the result only. Although I disagree that this issue was preserved below, review under the plain-error standard does not change the outcome. Despite the prosecutor's knowledge of defense counsel's earlier alleged statement and her skepticism of defendant's adamant denial, injecting prosecutorial testimony was improper and warrants reversal in this case. People v Christensen, 64 Mich App 23, 28-29; 235 NW2d 50 (1975) (a prosecutor engages in misconduct when the prosecutor injects personal knowledge into the proceedings through testimonial questioning); People v Brocato, 17 Mich App 277, 295; 169 NW2d 483 (1969) (same).

Defense counsel's redirect questioning indicates that defendant never consulted with counsel for such a purpose, but defense counsel's appellate brief now appears to admit the statement was made, albeit during plea negotiations. --------

/s/ Anica Letica


Summaries of

People v. Hardy

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
Nov 26, 2019
No. 339236 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2019)
Case details for

People v. Hardy

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AMANDA JENISE…

Court:STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

Date published: Nov 26, 2019

Citations

No. 339236 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2019)