A defendant’s failure to satisfy the plain-error test regarding a trial court’s alleged error doesn’t, by itself, prohibit the defendant from bringing an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

A plea agreement reached by a former Michigan senator was contrary to public policy because it prohibited the senator from seeking public office during his five-year probationary period.

A former Michigan lawmaker charged with perjury is not entitled to legislative immunity or evidentiary privilege under the Michigan Constitution, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

In People v Kennedy, a unanimous Michigan SCT held that the constitutional standard, which has already been adopted by the federal courts and most states, is the controlling law.

MCL 168.937, which is part of the state’s Election Law, is a penalty provision that does not create a substantive offense, the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled in a unanimous decision.

A trial court judge did not have to disqualify himself from the defendant’s criminal case even though the judge had publicly endorsed the prosecutor in a Circuit Court election campaign.

An ex-wife should not have been held in criminal contempt for having the parties’ child baptized without first consulting her ex-husband, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

It is well known in Michigan that attorneys who do court-appointed work are usually paid pretty miserably for their time. This is true both in the trial court and on appeal.

The MI Supreme Court released a unanimous decision in People v Stevens, where it reversed a defendant's conviction for second degree murder and child abuse and remanded to the trial court

The COA issued People v Lubkin, an unpublished decision vacating a trial court’s conviction of Attorney Lubkin for criminal contempt. In accordance with prior plans, on April 12, 2012, Attorney Lubkin and a client had lunch at a restaurant.

The case of People v Prentice provides some relevancy to Myspace. On June 19, 2010 a 15 year old victim and two other minors, including defendant’s son, ended up spending the night at the defendant’s house.

The issue of operating a vehicle while internally possessing marijuana pursuant to the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act (“MMMA”) was tackled this week by the Michigan Supreme Court in its review of People v. Koon.

In People v Maliszewski, it was brought to the Trial Court’s attention that one of the jurors had used Wikipedia to define “reasonable doubt” and “corroborating evidence.”

The Michigan Court of Appeals addressed an issue of first impression: does the Second Amendment bar the prosecution of an individual for possessing or using a firearm while intoxicated under MCL 750.237, where the individual is in their own home?

In a recent opinion, the Michigan Supreme Court in People v Trakhtenberg, addressed a very narrow issue - the use of collateral estoppel by the prosecution to prevent a criminal defendant from challenging his trial counsel’s effectiveness.

When I attended oral argument the other day in People v Trakhtenberg (SCT Docket 143386), it was interesting to listen to the court's questions