Trending
ALPENA -- An Alpena man won't get a second chance to argue that he should have a second chance at proving his innocence.
On Wednesday, the Michigan Supreme Court refused to let Bernard Dziuba try again to explain why Alpena courts were wrong when they sent him to jail in 2020 on a charge of resisting police.
The state Court of Appeals shot down Dzibua's first appeal in January.
In June 2019, police tried to break through Dziuba's front door when his son, whom police were trying to arrest, fled inside the home.
After trying and failing to breach the front door on the authority of a search warrant, officers knocked on the back door, then forced their way into the home, according to court documents.
Inside, Dziuba was hostile and refused to follow police orders. When he moved toward a closed door, an officer who had given him multiple warnings released a police dog, which bit Dziuba and enabled his arrest, police said.
Police found Dziuba's son hiding in an attic.
Dziuba was acquitted of harboring a fugitive but found guilty of resisting or obstructing a police officer and sentenced to 10 months in jail.
Dziuba claimed police were in the wrong when they entered his house because, he said, the search warrant they had obtained was based on what he called an illegal search of his yard.
Even if a search warrant later turns out to be invalid, a person does not have the right to forcibly resist police executing it, the appeals court said.
The appeals court waved aside Dziuba's argument that the court owed him a jury trial after he changed his mind about his request to be tried by a judge.
It also vetoed his contention that his trial should have been postponed when he said he wanted a new lawyer.
The state has to provide an attorney to a person who can't afford one, but the defendant doesn't have to like that attorney, the appeals court said.
Julie Riddle can be reached at 989-358-5693, jriddle@thealpenanews.com or on Twitter @jriddleX.