Rape conviction upheld despite juror's sex crime
Legal News Center
The Michigan Supreme Court on Tuesday let stand a rape conviction that was challenged because a juror didn't disclose that he had been convicted of a sex crime.
Michigan law bars felons from serving on a jury.
But the high court voted 5-2 to uphold the conviction, ruling there was no evidence the juror was biased in the trial of Michael Allen Miller in Ottawa County.
Miller, now 31, was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct in 2006 for forcing the 7-year-old daughter of his girlfriend at the time to perform a sex act on him.
Before his sentencing, Miller learned that a juror had concealed that he was convicted of assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct in 1991 and 1999 for assaulting his sister and a child.
Justice Stephen Markman wrote that defendants have a constitutional right to an impartial jury but don't have a constitutional right to be tried by a jury without felons. The ruling reversed a decision by the Michigan Court of Appeals, which in January ordered a new trial.
"There is simply no evidence that this juror improperly affected any other jurors," Markman said.
Dissenting Justice Marilyn Kelly called the majority's opinion "unworkable" and "unjust," arguing that jurors' honesty is essential to picking a fair jury.
Gary Kohut, Miller's court-appointed appellate attorney, said he doesn't know yet whether a federal appeal will be filed.
"It's dangerous to say a fair and impartial jury can exist with a convicted felony on the jury," Kohut said. "It really is a fraud on the court for that (juror) to have done what he did."
Related listings
-
Number of uncounted ballots in Minn. still unclear
Legal News Center 12/30/2008The campaigns of Republican Norm Coleman and Democrat Al Franken wrangled Monday over hundreds of unopened absentee ballots that could still tip Minnesota's Senate race.Lawyers ended a testy public negotiation session convened by the secretary of sta...
-
Blagojevich lawyer to submit Obama report to panel
Legal News Center 12/29/2008The lead attorney for Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he plans to submit President-elect Barack Obama's internal report on contacts with the scandal-plagued governor to the Illinois House committee weighing impeachment.Attorney Ed Genson told the Chicago S...
-
Feds rights to baseball drug tests back in court
Legal News Center 12/19/2008Federal appeals judges voiced skepticism Thursday that prosecutors had the right to seize urine samples of more than 100 major league players not originally involved in the BALCO drug investigation.In a case dealing with the government's search-and-s...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.