PEOPLE OF MI V GERALD ALAN SHORT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
October 25, 2007
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 266368
Kent Circuit Court
LC No. 05-000708-FH
GERALD ALAN SHORT,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Sawyer and Murray, JJ.
HOEKSTRA, P.J., (concurring in part; dissenting in part).
Although I agree with the majority opinion in all other respects, I respectfully disagree
that on the record before us we can dispose of defendant’s claim that he is entitled to a new trial
on the basis of newly discovered evidence. Rather, even though I agree with the majority that
two of the factors necessary for a new trial are satisfied on the record before us, see People v
Johnson, 451 Mich 115, 118 n 6; 545 NW2d 637 (1996), I conclude that the case should be
remanded to the trial court for a hearing to address whether defendant should have discovered
the evidence before trial and the effect the new evidence may have had on the outcome. The
record before us is silent regarding how this evidence came to the defendant’s attention after trial
and what efforts, if any, were made prior to trial to investigate the reliability of the jail house
snitch’s testimony. Thus, there is nothing in the record before this Court to support the
majority’s conclusion that the evidence could have been discovered and produced at trial with
reasonable diligence. Additionally, I believe the trial court, who observed the witnesses’
testimony, particularly the victim and defendant, is better able to evaluate the impact that
undermining the credibility of the snitch’s testimony may have had on the outcome of the trial
than we are on the cold record before us.
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
-1-
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.
