People v. Houston (1995)

green · 437 citation events across 4 courts. Showing the 19 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).

All Green 19

Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then

199520102026

Sort: By significance · Most recent

green In Re Perrigo Company (1997)

Quote Authority · 6th Cir. · 4 citations in this opinion

See, e.g., United States v. Bilzerian, 926 F.2d 1285, 1292 (2d Cir.) (“A defendant may not use the [attorney-client] privilege to prejudice his opponent’s case or to disclose some selected communications for self-serving purposes.”), cer t. denied, 502 U.S. 813 , 112 S.Ct. 63 , 116 L.Ed.2d 39 (1991); Houston , 532 N.W.2d at 516 (“[A party] cannot be allowed, after disclosing as much as he pleases, to withhold the remainder.”) (quoting 8 Wig-more, Evidence (McNaughton rev.) §…

“[A party] cannot be allowed, after disclosing as much as he pleases, to withhold the remainder.”

green People of Michigan v. Angel Michelle Gioglio (2014)

Quote Authority · Mich. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion

See also People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 324 ; 532 NW2d 508 (1995) (“In imposing sentence, a trial court may consider a defendant’s own perjury where there is a rational basis in the record for concluding that the defendant wilfully made a flagrantly false statement on a material issue.”) In the present case, during trial, defendant denied taking Arntz’s checkbook or committing the charged offense.

“In imposing sentence, a trial court may consider a defendant’s own perjury where there is a rational basis in the record for concluding that the defendant wilfully made a flagrantly false statement on a material issue.”

green People of Michigan v. Todd Louis Ison (2020)

Quote Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 324 ; 532 NW2d 508 (1995) (“In imposing sentence, a trial court may consider a defendant’s own perjury where there is a rational basis in the -1- record for concluding that the defendant willfully made a flagrantly false statement on a material issue.”). /s/ Anica Letica -2-

“In imposing sentence, a trial court may consider a defendant’s own perjury where there is a rational basis in the -1- record for concluding that the defendant willfully made a flagrantly false statement on a material issue.”

green People of Michigan v. Frank Earl Tyson (2020)

Rule Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

Because of that fact, “[m]isbehavior after arrest is clearly a legitimate factor to consider at sentencing.” Houston, 448 Mich at 323 (citations omitted).

citations omitted

green Pollard v. MaCauley (2019)

Quote Authority · E.D. Mich.

Lack of remorse and potential for rehabilitation are appropriate sentencing considerations under Michigan law, see People v. Houston, 448 Mich. 312, 323 (1995), and are not precluded by federal law, see In re Cook, 551 F.3d 542, 551 (6th Cir. 2009) ("It is well established that a defendant's remorse—or lack thereof—is an appropriate consideration in meting out punishment.").

"It is well established that a defendant's remorse—or lack thereof—is an appropriate consideration in meting out punishment."

green People of Michigan v. Andrew Thomas Cowhy (2019)

Rule Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

Id. at 316, 330 .

green People of Michigan v. James William Freese II (2017)

Rule Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

The following criteria bear on the question: (1) the seriousness of the offense; (2) factors that were inadequately considered by the guidelines; and (3) factors not considered by the guidelines, such as the relationship between the victim and the aggressor, the defendant’s misconduct while in custody, the defendant’s expressions of remorse, and the defendant’s potential for rehabilitation. [People v Steanhouse, 313 Mich App 1, 46 ; 880 NW2d 297 (2015),3 citing People v Hous…

green People of Michigan v. Johnny Miller (2017)

Rule Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

In Steanhouse, this Court referred to Milbourn and People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 321, 323 ; 532 NW2d 508 (1995), articulating a non-exclusive list of factors that Michigan courts had previously weighed in meeting the proportionality standard, such as: (1) the seriousness of the offense, (2) factors that were inadequately considered by the guidelines, and (3) factors not considered by the guidelines, such as the relationship between the victim and the aggressor, the defenda…

green People of Michigan v. Johnny Miller (2017)

Rule Authority · Mich. Ct. App.

green 360 Construction Co. v. Atsalis Bros. Painting Co. (2012)

Rule Authority · E.D. Mich.

“When the client alleges a breach of duty to him by the attorney, the privilege is waived as to all communications relevant to that issue.” People v. Houston, 448 Mich. 312, 332 , 532 N.W.2d 508, 516 (1995) (quoting 8 Wigmore, Evidence § 2327, 636-38).

quoting 8 Wigmore, Evidence § 2327, 636-38

green People of Michigan v. Christian Jordon Elledge (2021)

Cited · Mich. Ct. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion

See People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 323 ; 532 NW2d 508 (1995); People v Wesley, 428 Mich 708 ; 411 NW2d 159 (1987).

green People of Michigan v. Abel Nodarse (2022)

Cited (see also) · Mich. Ct. App. · signal: see also

“However, evidence of a lack of remorse can be considered in determining an individual’s potential for rehabilitation.” Id.; see also People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 323 ; 532 NW2d 508 (1995).

green People of Michigan v. Justin David Langsford (2022)

Cited (see also) · Mich. Ct. App. · signal: see, e.g.

See, e.g., People v Houston, 448 Mich 312, 322 ; 532 NW2d 508 (1995).

green People of Michigan v. Michael Alan Latimer (2019)