In People v. Furman, 158 Mich App 302, 320; 404 NW2d 246 (1987), the defendant, who was charged with first-degree murder, argued that the trial court had abused its discretion in denying his motion to bifurcate his trial because "the demands of due process and a fair trial should have resulted in a favorable ruling since both of the defense theories, namely, a reasonable doubt and legal insanity, were substantial." The trial court denied the defendant's motion for the reason that the "defendant would not suffer undue prejudice by presenting the defense of insanity before the same jury which would determine his guilt or innocence." Id. The Court found that defendant had not been prejudiced by presenting the inconsistent defenses to a single jury and that the trial court had not abused its discretion in denying defendant's motion. Id. at 320-321.