PEOPLE OF MI V SPENCER J OLIVER
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 191988
Oakland Circuit Court
LC No. 95-137938-FC
QUENTIN DEE BETTY,
Defendant-Appellant.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 192776
Oakland Circuit Court
LC No. 95-137939-FC
SPENCER JORY OLIVER,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________________________
Before: Bandstra, P.J., and Griffin and Fitzgerald, JJ.
FITZGERALD, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part.)
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that defendant Betty was not denied the
effective assistance of counsel. A defendant is entitled to a trial separate and apart from a codefendant
who it appears m testify to exculpate himself and incriminate the defendant seeking a separate trial.
ay
People v Hoffman, 205 Mich App 1, 19-20; 518 NW2d 817 (1994). In my opinion, defendant
Oliver’s testimony was inconsistent and irreconcilable with defendant Betty’s defense that he shot the
victim in self-defense. People v Hana, 447 Mich 325, 349; 524 NW2d 682 (1994). Further, had
defendant Oliver been separately tried, or tried before a separate jury at a joint trial, the jury would not
have been permitted to hear defendant Oliver’s inadmissible out-of-court statements. Bruton v United
States, 391 US 123; 88 S Ct 1620; 20 L Ed 2d 476 (1968). I would remand for a Ginther1 hearing
-1
to determine if there was any legitimate trial strategy that
-2
could have resulted in counsel’s failure to bring a motion to sever the trial or at least a motion for
separate juries. People v Stanaway, 446 Mich 643, 687-688; 521 NW2d 57 (1994).
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
1
People v Ginther, 390 Mich 436; 212 NW2d 922 (1973). Defendant filed a motion to remand with
this Court concurrent with his brief on appeal. This Court denied the motion on September 10, 1996.
Defendant filed a motion for interlocutory appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court on November 5,
1996, which is still pending.
-3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
