Michigan Supreme Court Blog

Yesterday, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued its opinion in People v Jarrud Payne , Docket No. 314816 , in a case where the trial judge sentenced the defendant to a 30 year to 50 year term of imprisonment in a case where the defendant was convicted of an offense carrying a 25-year mandatory minimum.  In a per curiam opinion, the Court reversed on the sentencing issue and remanded the matter to the trial court for resentencing. Payne, 17 1/2 years old at the time of the offense, was convicted following a jury trial of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree where the victim was less than 13 years old.  The victim, a five-year-old boy, testified Payne had "stuck his pee-pee in my butt and it hurt." Payne, when confronted with the allegations by sheriff's deputies, initially denied the allegations but subsequently admitted to doing the act. The defense argued Payne, after suffering from years of mental health issues, was legally insane at the time of the offense. ...

Tomorrow, at 10:00am, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a case that I believe will have a significant impact for those of us who regularly practice in trial courts.  In Navarette v California , Docket No. 12-9490, the Court is presented with this question: Does the Fourth Amendment require an officer who receives an anonymous tip regarding a drunken or reckless driver to corroborate dangerous driving before stopping the vehicle? Lorenzo and Jose Navarette were stopped by officers from the California Highway Patrol after the CHP received a tip from another agency who had gotten a 911 call from a motorist who called to say a silver pickup truck had just run someone off the road.  The CHP stopped the truck 19 minutes after the call came in and after following the truck for five miles, observing no illegal or suspicious driving.  The officers quickly detected the odor of marijuana coming from the interior of the truck and searched it, finding a la...

Yesterday, the Michigan Court of Appeals published an opinion affirming the first degree home invasion conviction of a defendant who decided not to testify in his own defense because the trial court had ruled, in limine, that the prosecution could impeach him with a prior home invasion conviction under MRE 609 .  In People v McDonald , Docket No. 311412 (December 17, 2013), Judges Borello, Fitzgerald and Murphy held that Gerald McDonald had failed to even preserve the issue because he did not testify in the trial. The defendant was accused of having broken in to a woman's apartment and, with a silver pistol, ordered her to give him money.  She told the intruder she had no money and he left, taking her purse from where she had left it in the kitchen.  The police attempted to arrest defendant a short distance from the apartment, but still in the same complex, and the defendant resisted.  During the struggle the Officers discovered a silver pistol on the ground whe...

The Michigan Court of Appeals recently affirmed the Oakland County conviction of a Michigan Medical Marijuana Act card holder, when he delivered a small amount of marijuana to an undercover officer who possessed a fabricated medical marijuana card.  In People v VanSickle , Docket Number 309555 (November 5, 2013), Judges Servitto, Cavanagh and Wilder held, in a published opinion, that the trial court did not err in granting the prosecution's motion in limine requesting an order that the defendant be prevented from mentioning in the trial that he was a medical marijuana patient and, therefore, legally delivered the marijuana to another patient pursuant to Sec. 4 of the Act. Jason VanSickle was arrested following the investigation of a Ferndale dispensary in 2010  (incidentally, the trial court had dismissed charges against seven of the owners or operators of the dispensary.)  During that investigation, undercover officers, posing as legitimate medical marijuana patients,...

Bay City Central High School Earlier this past week, the Michigan Court of Appeals decided the issue of whether a substitute teacher can be tried for criminal sexual conduct with a student when the alleged acts occur in the summertime when school is not in session.  In People v Heidi Leanne Lewis , Docket No. 310949 , a per curiam opinion, the Court held that the fact the teacher was not technically in a position of authority over the student at the time of the alleged acts, the Bay County Circuit Court's decision to dismiss the charge against the teacher was, nonetheless, error.  The Court reinstated the case against Heidi Leanne Lewis and remanded the matter to Bay County for further disposition. Apparently, a number of male students had alleged that Ms. Lewis had engaged with them in sexual acts that occurred during the summer months.  According to the Associated Press , Lewis taught British Literature in a special education class at Bay City Central High Sc...

Yesterday, the Michigan Court of Appeals, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the dismissal of charges against John Prominski , the pastor at Resurrection Life Church in Ionia, Michigan who had been charged by the Ionia County Prosecutor's Office with failing to report suspected child abuse.   People v Prominski, Docket No. 309682. Section 3 of the Michigan Child Protection Law mandates the reporting of suspected child abuse or neglect to the authorities by members of the clergy. MCL 722.623 .  However, MCL 722.631, in abrogating any other privileged communications, retains what we commonly refer to as the "priest-penitent" privilege, those communications "made to a member of the clergy in his or her professional character in a confession or similarly confidential communication." In 2009, one of Rev. Prominski's parishioners approached him, seeking his advice as to what to do, because she suspected that her husband was molesting her two young daughters....

This past week, Justice David Viviano had the opportunity to issue his first opinions dealing with appeals in criminal cases.  In People v Hardy and People v Glenn , Docket Numbers 144327 and 144979 , two cases consolidated for the appeal, the Court dealt with the proper scoring of Offense Variable 7.  In each case the trial court had assessed 50 points for the variable because the statute authorizes scoring where "a victim was treated with sadism, torture, or excessive brutality or conduct designed to substantially increase the fear and anxiety a victim suffered during the offense."  MCL 777.37(1)(a).  Hardy's carjacking case originated in Oakland County (Judge Michael Warren) and Glenn plead guilty to armed robbery in Jackson County (Judge John McBain). The prosecutor argued that Hardy had engaged in conduct designed to substantially increase the fear and anxiety of the victim when, in addition to pointing a shotgun at the victim in order to steal the car, he...