Felony Trials in Michigan Counties

Abstract

In 1927 the Legislature of the State of Michigan revised its code, permitting, among other changes, an option, in the discretion of the defendant, of trial by jury or by the Court without a jury. Incidentally this permissive provision is one plank of the socalled criminal code reform movement which gave birth, in Michigan and elsewhere, to curious progeny, such as are embodied in the Baumes Laws (of increased penalties for repeaters) and the like. Data relative to the employment, proportionate selection of jury and juryless trials, comparative sentences and time consumed, in the specific instance of the Recorder's Court of Detroit, Michigan, have been published in an abstract' and in a more comprehensive article.2 Oppenheim,3 in an excellent exposition of the legal precedents and authority for the provision, propounds the thesis that of Jury trial may not be denied a defendant yet, similar to the waiving of an examination, is also inherent, not to the State, but to the safeguards of personal liberties. He further points out the loosely used, oft-quoted constitutional guarantee of right of trial by a jury of peers to the contrary notwithstanding, that permissive waiver may legally be provided either by constitutional amendment or judicial interpretation. In the former instance the United States Supreme Court ruling4 and the decision of the Illinois State Supreme Court (as the result of a test case)5 lend authoritative opinion to these views. All of which is of greatest import to those interested in equitable administration of justice and most certainly to the advocates of speedy justice. The present discussion is an extension of the Recorder's Court study and concerns itself with the usage of the optional method of trial in several rural Michigan jurisdictions. Collaterally, the question had been raised of the use of the plea of guilty as a mode of