Speaker Law
Blog

In a recent Court of Appeals decision, the answer was a resounding "no." In People v Maliszewski, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued April 9, 2013 (Docket No. 308879), it was brought to the Trial Court’s attention that one of the jurors had used Wikipedia to define “reasonable doubt” and “corroborating evidence.” In addition to these pages being printed out and handed to several other jury members, the jury foreman read the research about reasonable doubt to all the jurors. However, the Trial Court, citing People v Messenger, 221 Mich App 171, 176; 561 NW2d 463 (1997), concluded that no mistrial was necessary after conducting voir dire with the jury and confirming they could purge what they had read and strictly follow the court’s instructions. The Court of Appeals affirmed, noting that the Trial Court’s actions were proper, and did not fall outside the range of principled outcomes, nor did it impair Defendant’s ability to receive a fair trial.

Labels: criminal appeal, fair trial, Juror Misconduct, jurors, Michigan, mistrial, reasonable doubt, Saginaw County, wikipedia

---

As I was reading COA's decision in Frost v Minnesota Life Insurance Co, I noted the court's citation to DSM-IV (the leading diagnostic treatise for mental disorders). That citation made me recall another case where the Michigan Supreme Court cited to Wikipedia to define a psychological term. In MDOT v Haggerty Corridor, Justice Young relied on Wikipedia to define a psychological phenomenon known as "hindsight bias" (see note 36 of the opinion). In Justice Young's defense, the case had nothing to do psychology; instead he was making an analogy. But it seems that the courts are more willing to cite to Wikipedia, and presumably so are the litigants before them. It seems dangerous to rely on a "source" that can be edited by anyone at any time, regardless of accuracy of the post or expertise of the poster.

Labels: DSM-IV, Hindsight Basis, Justice Young, lansing, Michigan, Wiki, wikipedia

---