The Michigan Supreme Court will hear arguments in a criminal case today as part of its Community Connections program. Should Michigan adopt its own test for when prosecutorial misconduct bars retrial? People v Jennings, case info:
www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

Tomorrow, the Michigan Supreme Court will hear arguments in one criminal case, People v Alexander. Did the prosecution expert invade the province of the jury by testifying that her diagnosis of the complainant was "medical torture"? Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

Michigan Supreme Court's last criminal case this morning is People v Klungle. Did trial counsel go against the defendant's wishes by conceding guilt on the less serious charge during closing arguments?
Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

In People v Black, a juvenile lifer case, the Michigan Supreme Court will decide whether the defendant can be required to submit to a psych exam by the prosecutor's expert as a precondition to admitting D's psych expert evidence.
Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

The Michigan Supreme Court will hear People v Eads today. Is a 50- to 70-year sentence okay for second-degree murder committed by a juvenile? Did the sentencing court need to consider the attributes of youth as a mitigating factor?
Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

Congratulations to Andrew Lievense on his appointment to the Michigan Court of Appeals, First District! A longtime supporter of ACS's Michigan Lawyer Chapter, Andrew is an outstanding addition to the Michigan bench.

www.michigan.gov/whitmer/news...

After subject asks for atty, police check and find no on-call atty is available. They leave subject in interrogation room for 3 hrs. When they return, he asks where his atty is, and they say "you don't get one." They start prepping him for jail, he starts talking, Miranda is read, he waives.

The Michigan Supreme Court's second confession case today is People v Fenderson, on reinitiating interrogation after invocation of right to counsel. Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

The Michigan Supreme Court will hear two cases on confessions today. First up, People v Sanders on how to determine admissibility of statement made during >48 hour delay between arrest and arraignment. Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

In the alternative, if the punishment is imposed for the current conviction, the argument is that it is cruel or unusual because it requires registration as a sex offender for a non-sex offense, contrary to People v Lymon.

The first argument is that this is an ex post facto violation, because it imposes punishment that was not authorized at the time of the commission of the prior offense. MSC recently held (Kardasz) that the current version of SORA is punishment, at least for cruel-or-unusual purposes.

The recapture provision requires a person to register as a sex offender if they are currently convicted of any felony and they have a prior conviction for a listed offense that did not require registration at the time.

Also today, the Michigan Supreme Court will consider the validity of the "recapture" provision of the Sex Offenders Registration Act, which requires registration for old sex offenses following new non-sex convictions. People v Ellis, case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

Under the probation statute, a person on probation must be ordered not to violate any federal criminal law (which includes marijuana use). But MRTMA provides that a person cannot suffer any penalty or be denied any right or privilege based on marijuana use that complies with MRTMA.

The Michigan Supreme Court will hear arguments today on whether probation can be revoked based on lawful (state) use of marijuana. The case turns on a conflict between the recreational marijuana act (MRTMA) and the probation statute. People v Hess, case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

The Michigan Supreme Court's only criminal argument today is in People v Haupt. Did the defendant validly waive or otherwise forfeit his right to counsel, and were the pretrial proceedings where he was w/o counsel critical stages? Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

The Michigan Supreme Court hears oral arguments today, tomorrow, and Thursday. Some big criminal cases I'm keeping an eye on: right to counsel, recreational marijuana, SORA, and confessions. Schedule and case info here: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

Previous post: bsky.app/profile/toat...

Peeler doesn't apply retroactively on collateral review, the Michigan Supreme Court holds in P v Robinson. Peeler held that a judge sitting as a one-person grand jury can't issue an indictment & the defendant is entitled to a preliminary examination. Opinion: www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/c...

Previous thread: bsky.app/profile/toat...

Just a week after hearing oral arguments, the Michigan Supreme Court denies leave to appeal in People v Jackson. Per the Court of Appeals opinion, OV 3 is not scored for a person who was killed during a gun fight following the sentencing offense. Order: www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/c...

Previous post, including link to briefs, etc. bsky.app/profile/toat...

The appeal raised the question of whether, in a case involving a plea deal, a sentencing court can score the guidelines for the convicted offense based on facts that would have supported the dismissed offense.

The Michigan Supreme Court has denied leave to appeal after oral arguments in People v Walker. The trial court's scoring of offense variable 15 (drug trafficking) remains in place. Justice Bolden dissents. Order: www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/c...

Yes, I noticed that too! As a colorblind person, I especially appreciated the confirmation that the blood spot was barely visible on the black denim.

Agreed. And after watching oral arguments, I think that's where the Court will end up. The record is unclear on what exactly went down between the assault and the gun fight. Several questions from the justices directed at trying to draw the line on what is too attenuated to count.

During homicide investigation, police suspected defendant (on arguably less than probable cause). He also had bench warrant for unrelated ordinance violation. After arrest, his pants were sent to forensics lab, which found a small blood spot. DNA test matched homicide victim. Any 4A problems?

When police arrest someone, do they need a warrant to forensically search the pants they were wearing? Does it matter if it was for a different offense? The Michigan Supreme Court will hear arguments on this today in People v Serges. Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...

The defendant assaulted a woman, who then called to family members for help. During the gun fight that followed, someone was killed. The defendant was convicted of the initial assault but he was not charged with anything connected to the gun fight. Was the deceased a victim of the initial assault?

In People v Jackson, the Michigan Supreme Court will consider who counts as a victim for purposes of scoring offense variable 3 (physical injury to a victim). Does it include someone who was killed in a gun fight following the sentencing offense? Case info: www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supre...