The Michigan Supreme Court this coming week will hear three criminal cases involving nonpayment of child support.
The cases are among more than a dozen that will be heard by the court on Oct. 4, 5 and 6 beginning at 9:30 a.m. each day. These oral arguments are open to the public.
In the three child support cases, the defendants failed to pay as ordered by family court judges. Each defendant was convicted of non-payment of child support, a felony, in separate criminal proceedings.
Although the defendants asserted that they lacked the ability to pay, the Court of Appeals allowed their convictions to stand.
In one case, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that evidence of inability to pay is not a valid defense to the strict liability crime of failing to pay child support.
In a second case, the appellate panel ruled that allowing the defendant to claim inability to pay in the criminal proceeding would amount to an improper collateral attack on the family court’s ruling. In another matter before the court, a man who was convicted of sexually abusing his wife’s young sister asserts that his constitutional rights were violated when the girl was allowed to testify against him from behind a screen.
In People v Rose, the trial court allowed the child to testify behind a screen after the girl’s therapist testified that the child was fearful of seeing the defendant, and that seeing him could cause the girl to freeze up during her testimony or suffer a relapse in her therapy.
While the screen kept the girl from seeing the defendant, he and others in the courtroom could see her.
The defendant, who was convicted of four counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, argues that the screen violated his constitutional right to confront those who were testifying against him. In adition, the screen impaired the presumption of innocence by making it appear to the jury that he was a danger to the child, the defendant contends.
The Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions, stating in part that trial judges have latitude to protect young witnesses.
Meanwhile, the high court will be hearing the matter of Judge James M. Justin, in which the Judicial Tenure Commission recommends that the court the Jackson district court judge from office.
The judge, while acknowledging some misconduct, contends that the recommended penalty is overly severe and overlooks his years of service.
The remaining nine cases the court will be considering include criminal, governmental immunity, insurance, medical malpractice, negligence, parental rights, and worker’s compensation issues.
In keeping with a long-standing custom, the court’s seven justices will hear the first case of October in the Old Courtroom in the Capitol building. The court will then adjourn and resume hearing oral arguments in its courtroom on the sixth floor of the Michigan Hall of Justice.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
