OUTLINE FOR SEARCH AND SEIZURE SEMINAR (CAP PRESENTATION ON 2/8/19) SECTION III MICHIGAN JURISPRUDENCE
(§ III - MI jurisprudence) TABLE OF CONTENTS III. MICHIGAN JURISPRUDENCE ............................................................................................................ 1 A. R ECENT M ICHIGAN S UPREME C OURT D ECISIONS ....................................................................................... 1 1. Search and Seizure Cases ............................................................................................................. 1 People v Mead , --- Mich ---; --- NW2d ---; No. 156376, 2019 WL 1769597 (April 22, 2019) ..........................................................................1 Search & Seizure --- Auto Stops and Searches --- Expectation of privacy --- Search of a Vehicle Passenger’s Backpack --- Standing --- Apparent Common Authority --- Use of Backpack --- Determination of Ownership --- Consent Search--- Scope of Consent --- Warrant Exceptions --- Other Grounds for Search--- Exclusionary Rule ............................ 1 Held: Defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in his backpack and the warrantless search of the backpack violated the Fourth Amendment. People v Labelle overruled. Because the driver did not have apparent common authority over the backpack, the search of it was not based on valid consent and was per se unreasonable absent another, applicable exception to the warrant requirement. Moreover, “we agree with the Court of Appeals that none of the other exceptions to the warrant requirement has been satisfied. ” .................................................................................. 1 People v Wood , --- Mich ---; 923 NW2d 884 (2019) (mem), rev'ing and remanding 321 Mich App 415; 910 NW2d 364 (2017) ............................3 Auto searches --- Automobile Exception --- Defendant’s Admission --- Plain View --- Probable Cause .................................................................................................................. 3 Held : [W]arrantless search of the defendant’s vehicle was properly executed pursuant to the automobil e exception. Based on the defendant’s admission of criminal activity and the presence of nitrous oxide canisters in the Trooper’s plain view, the Trooper had probable cause to believe that the defendant had committed a crime and that evidence of that crime was located within the vehicle. See People v Kazmierczak , 461 Mich 411, 418 – 419 (2000). .............................................................. 3 2. Select Other Issues ....................................................................................................................... 3 People v Parkmallory , --- Mich App ----; --- NW2d ---; No. 342546; 2019 WL 2146352 (May 16, 2019) ........................................................3 IAC --- New Trial ---- Stipulations --- Firearm Ineligibility --- Specified and Non-Specified Felony --- Felon in Possession --- Felony Firearm --- Restoration of Gun Rights Under State Law, MCL 28.424(1); ---- Prosecution of Firearms Offense, MCL 776.20 --- Successfully & Perfectly Defined --- Probation .................................................................. 3 i
(§ III - MI jurisprudence) Held: In an issue of first impression, the court adopted a definition of “successfully” for purposes of MCL 750.224f(1)(c) . Defendant’s lawyer provided ineffective assistance when he stipulated that defendant was ineligible to possess a firearm because of his prior conviction [an unspecified felony]. But for this deficient performance, there was a reasonable probability that the trial’s outcome would have been different. Reversed the convictions of FIP and felony-firearm. .......................... 3 People v Anderson , 501 Mich 175; 912 NW2d 503 (2018) ..............................................4 Magistrate’s Duty --- Witness Credibility --- Preliminary Examination --- Standards for Evaluating Claims --- Preliminary Examination --- New Trial ............................................ 4 Held : (1) a magistrate's duty at a preliminary examination is to consider all the evidence, including the credibility of witnesses; .......................................................... 4 (2) the standard for evaluating evidence on a motion for a new trial does not apply to a preliminary examination; and .................................................................................... 4 (3) conclusion that complainant's testimony was not credible and dismissal of complaint were not abuses of discretion...................................................................... 4 People v Cook , 323 Mich App 435; 918 NW2d 536, app den --- Mich ---; 920 NW2d 126 (2018) .............................................................4 MMMA --- Defenses --- Waiver ---Unconditional Guilty Plea ............................................ 4 Held : Affirmative defense under Medical Marihuana Act for unregistered medical use is not a jurisdictional defense, and is thus waived by an unconditional guilty plea or a plea of nolo contendere. ............................................................................................... 4 People v Randolph , 502 Mich 1; 917 NW2d 249 (2018) ..................................................4 Standards--- Trial Court Errors --- Plain-Error --- Ineffective-Assistance --- Strickland Standards .......................................................................................................................... 4 Held : Defendant’s failure to satisfy the pla in-error test as to a trial court error, by itself, does not preclude an ineffective assistance of counsel claim related to the same error. The Court of Appeals “impermissibly conflated the plain -error and ineffective- assistance standards” in analyzing th e claims and thus, failed to properly apply Strickland to his ineffective-assistance claims. ............................................................. 4 See : People v Randolph (on remand), No. 321551 [2019 WL 286678( Mich Ct App, Jan 22, 2019)] (no IAC for failure, inter alia, to file motion to suppress evidence). ........... 4 B. R ECENT C OURT OF A PPEALS P UBLISHED S EARCH AND S EIZURE C ASES ........................................................... 5 People v Anthony , ---Mich App ---; --- NW2d --- (2019); COA No. 337793; 2019 WL 290026 (Jan 22, 2019) [2-1 opinion, Gleicher, J, dissenting] .......................5 Search & Seizure --- Timing - When & How Seizure Occurred --- Timing of Officers’ Decision to Investigate Truck --- Terry Stop ---Timing of Officers Arrival in Police Car --- ii
Recommend
More recommend
