One Court of Justice

On January 30, 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court entered orders on miscellaneous procedural motions granting extensions to the briefing schedule in several cases and granting various parties leave to file amicus briefs.  The Court also revised its order granting a motion for sanctions for a frivolous appeal in Jacobson v. Norfolk Development Corporation.

On Thursday, January 29, the MSC took action in two cases.  In one, the MSC denied a prisoner’s motion to waive the filing fees.  In the other, Jacobson v. Norfolk Development Corp., the MSC also granted sanctions against the appellant, ruling that there “was no reasonable basis for belief that there was a meritorious issue to be determined on appeal.”

In yesterday’s order list, the Michigan Supreme Court granted applications in two criminal cases.

• In People v. Idziak, the Court asked the parties to brief the following questions:  (1) whether the Parole Board is required to compute a new parole eligibility date for inmates who commit new criminal offenses while on parole; (2) if so, whether this requirement is satisfied by MDOC’s current policy; (3)  whether (a) the judiciary is precluded from reviewing such a decision, or (b) the decision can constitute a violation of a defendant’s right to due process or equal protection; and (4) whether a trial court is authorized, required, or not authorized to award jail credit to parolees under MCL 769.11b.  The Court invited the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan to file amicus curiae briefs by April 2, 2009; all other interested persons or groups may move for leave to file amicus curiae briefs by that same date.

Read more »

As previously reported in this Blog, the Michigan Supreme Court is accepting comments until May 1 on two proposals addressing cellphone use in Michigan courts.  The Battle Creek Enquirer weighs in with its recommendation here.

Tom Goldstein, founder of the SCOTUSBlog, has issued his short list of potential U.S. Supeme Court nominees in the event that Justices Stevens and/or Souter retire at the end of the Term, as expected.  He lists three frontrunners and one “sleeper” candidate, Governor Jennifer Granholm.  The full post can be read here.

On January 27, 2009, the COA issued a published opinion in Lansing Schools Education Assocation v. Lansing School District Board of Education, No. 279895, affirming the lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit against the school district by its teachers’ union challenging the school district’s discipline of students because the teachers’ union lacked standing.

Read more »

On Tuesday, the Michigan Supreme Court denied 69 applications for leave to appeal, denied reconsideration in 14 other appeals, and held one application for leave to appeal in abeyance pending a decision in a separate appeal that might resolve the issue presented.  The Court also clarified its remand order in Young v. Nandi, No. 134799.

On Monday, the Supreme Court denied in one case an appellant’s motion to waive his filing fee.

On Friday, the Michigan Supreme Court denied leave in one case and remanded one case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of an additional issue.  The Court also took substantive action in the following cases:

People v. Whitaker:  the Court reversed, in part, the decision of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to the Wayne County Circuit Court for a hearing to obtain testimony of an alibi witness.  After the hearing, the circuit court is ordered to grant a new trial unless it finds that the absence of the witness from the first trial is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.  The order can be found here.

People v. Oliver:  the Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals, vacated the trial court’s sentence, and remanded the case to the Genesee County Circuit Court for resentencing.  The Court explained that the trial court failed to offer a valid explanation of why an upward departure from the sentencing guidelines was warranted.  Justice Weaver dissented, relying on her opinion in People v. Babcock, 469 Mich. 247, 280-84 (2003), because she believed that the trial court offered “a substantial and compelling reason” for its departure.  The order can be found here.

People v. Biskner:  the Court remanded the case to the Tuscola County Circuit Court in lieu of granting leave to appeal for a hearing under People v. Ginther, 390 Mich. 436 (1973), to assess appellate counsel’s claim that trial defense counsel was ineffective because she failed to request a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense.  The Court retained jurisdiction.  Justices Corrigan and Young dissented because they believe the request for a Ginther hearing was waived in the lower courts.  The order can be found here.

Yesterday, the Michigan Supreme Court took action in two appeals.  First, it denied an appellant’s motion seeking the waiver of filing fees.  Second, it dismissed an appeal because the appellant failed to pay the required filing fees.