PEOPLE OF MI V KENNETH MCINTOSH
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
December 6, 1996
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 166587
LC No. 92-010859
JESSIE LEE AGNEW,
Defendant-Appellant.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 169875
LC No. 92-010859
KENNETH MCINTOSH,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: White, P.J., and Smolenski, and R.R. Lamb,* JJ.
WHITE, J. (concurring).
In No. 166587 (Agnew), I concur in the affirmance of the trial court’s denial of the motion for
mistrial because I am satisfied that the limited reference to McIntosh’s statement and Edwards’ dealings
with McIntosh did not leave the jury with the impression that McIntosh implicated Agnew. As to the
issue of the incomplete rereading of Hollingsworth’s testimony, a review of the testimony actually read
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1
to the jury, which included considerable cross-examination, and the testimony not read leads me to
conclude that defendant suffered no prejudice from the court’s ruling.
In No. 169975 (McIntosh), I conclude that Hollingsworth’s testimony regarding offenses for
which McIntosh was acquitted in the first trial was admissible because it supported the prosecutor’s
position that McIntosh’s statement to police was accurate and credible.
As to the remaining issues, I join in the per curiam opinion.
/s/ Helene N. White
-2
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.
