 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Kulpinski10/17/2000
not required to read defendant his Miranda warnings.
We further conclude, contrary to defendant's contention, that pursuant to MCL 257.625a(6)(e); MSA 9.2325(1)(6)(e), an objection to the admission of defendant's blood alcohol test results would have been meritless. The testimony introduced at trial indicates the test was done in response to a work order from an emergency room doctor and the blood was drawn for medical purposes. There is no justification in the record for defendant's assertion that there was police involvement with the blood alcohol test. Accordingly, admission of the blood test results was totally appropriate and admissible. In fact, the statute makes disclosure of such results mandatory, not just permissible, "regardless of whether the person had been offered or had refused a chemical test." See also People v Perlos, 436 Mich 305; 462 NW2d 310 (1990).
Finally, because the evidence was properly admitted, defendant's contention that his trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to it is without merit. People v Pickens, 446 Mich 298, 309; 521 NW2d 797 (1994). Defense counsel is not required to raise a meritless objection. People v Torres (On Remand), 222 Mich App 411, 425; 564 NW2d 149 (1997).
Affirmed.
Richard Allen Griffin
William B. Murphy
Kurtis T. Wilder
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Michigan DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|