Michigan State Appellate Defender Office’s Dominica R. Convertino, Michael Mittlestat, and Jason Eggert will present argument before the Michigan Supreme Court on April 8, 9 and 22. The cases to be argued present issues associated with the right of an accused to assert his innocence and the effective assistance of counsel, the proper scope of expert testimony, and the appropriate test to determine whether prosecutorial misconduct bars retrial after a mistrial. In two other cases, SADO’s Maya Menlo and Jacqueline Ouvry will argue on behalf of amici SADO and the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan (CDAM).
—Dominica R. Convertino,People v Richard Edward Klungle| MSC No. 168010 (COA Nos. 364125, 367795)
The court directed the parties to address whether “whether trial counsel’s concession of the defendant’s guilt to trespassing deprived the defendant of his right to counsel and of the autonomy to decide that the objective of the defense is to assert his innocence. See McCoy v Louisiana, 584 US 414, 417 (2018); Florida v Nixon, 543 US 175 (2004).” The case is set for argument on April 8, at 1 p.m.
—Michael Mittlestat, People v Gwendolyn Josephine Alexander | MSC No. 168009 (COA No. 364063)
The court directed the parties to address “whether the prosecution’s medical expert invaded the province of the jury by using the phrase 'medical torture' to label her diagnosis of the child complainant.” The case is set for argument on April 9, at 9:30 a.m.
—Jason Eggert, People v Devante Kyran Jennings | MSC No. 165764 (COA No. 359837)
The cCourt directed the parties to address “(1) whether there is a ‘compelling reason’ under the Michigan Constitution to adopt a different test from the one set forth in Oregon v Kennedy, 456 US 667, 675-676 (1982), to determine whether prosecutorial misconduct bars retrial, see People v Bullock, 440 Mich 15, 28-35 (1992); but see People v Nutt, 469 Mich 565, 590 (2004); (2) if so, whether this Court should adopt a test from another state or develop factors that expound on the ‘bad faith’ test previously adopted in Michigan, see United States v Dinitz, 424 US 600, 611 (1976); People v Anderson, 409 Mich 474, 485 (1980); Pool v Superior Court, 139 Ariz 98, 108-109 (1984); and People v Tyson, 423 Mich 357, 371-372 (1985); and (3) whether retrial was permissible in this case.” The case is set for argument on April 22, at 9:30 a.m.
—Maya Menlo, People v James Gregory Eads | MSC No. 168205 (COA No. 357332)
Menlo will argue on behalf of amicus Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan (CDAM). The case is set for argument on April 8, at 9:30 a.m.
—Jacqueline Ouvry, People v Donyelle Black | MSC No. 168159 (COA No. 367831)
Ouvry will argue on behalf of amicus State Appellate Defender Office (SADO). The case is set for argument on April 8, at 10:10 a.m.
Case briefs and related materials are available at www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supreme-court/schedule-of-oral-arguments. The arguments will be livestreamed from the MSC website.
—Dominica R. Convertino,People v Richard Edward Klungle| MSC No. 168010 (COA Nos. 364125, 367795)
The court directed the parties to address whether “whether trial counsel’s concession of the defendant’s guilt to trespassing deprived the defendant of his right to counsel and of the autonomy to decide that the objective of the defense is to assert his innocence. See McCoy v Louisiana, 584 US 414, 417 (2018); Florida v Nixon, 543 US 175 (2004).” The case is set for argument on April 8, at 1 p.m.
—Michael Mittlestat, People v Gwendolyn Josephine Alexander | MSC No. 168009 (COA No. 364063)
The court directed the parties to address “whether the prosecution’s medical expert invaded the province of the jury by using the phrase 'medical torture' to label her diagnosis of the child complainant.” The case is set for argument on April 9, at 9:30 a.m.
—Jason Eggert, People v Devante Kyran Jennings | MSC No. 165764 (COA No. 359837)
The cCourt directed the parties to address “(1) whether there is a ‘compelling reason’ under the Michigan Constitution to adopt a different test from the one set forth in Oregon v Kennedy, 456 US 667, 675-676 (1982), to determine whether prosecutorial misconduct bars retrial, see People v Bullock, 440 Mich 15, 28-35 (1992); but see People v Nutt, 469 Mich 565, 590 (2004); (2) if so, whether this Court should adopt a test from another state or develop factors that expound on the ‘bad faith’ test previously adopted in Michigan, see United States v Dinitz, 424 US 600, 611 (1976); People v Anderson, 409 Mich 474, 485 (1980); Pool v Superior Court, 139 Ariz 98, 108-109 (1984); and People v Tyson, 423 Mich 357, 371-372 (1985); and (3) whether retrial was permissible in this case.” The case is set for argument on April 22, at 9:30 a.m.
—Maya Menlo, People v James Gregory Eads | MSC No. 168205 (COA No. 357332)
Menlo will argue on behalf of amicus Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan (CDAM). The case is set for argument on April 8, at 9:30 a.m.
—Jacqueline Ouvry, People v Donyelle Black | MSC No. 168159 (COA No. 367831)
Ouvry will argue on behalf of amicus State Appellate Defender Office (SADO). The case is set for argument on April 8, at 10:10 a.m.
Case briefs and related materials are available at www.courts.michigan.gov/courts/supreme-court/schedule-of-oral-arguments. The arguments will be livestreamed from the MSC website.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://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
