Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Orzamegreen2 sentences2020People v Ericksen, 288 Mich App 192, 201 ; 793 NW2d 120 (2010) (“Failing to advance a meritless argument or raise a futile objection does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”). 23 Wang, 503 Mich at 987. 24 MCL 400.601 et seq. 10 present or cause to be made or presented to an employee or officer of this state a claim under the social welfare act, 1939 PA 280 , MCL 400.1 to 400.119b, upon or against the state, knowing the claim to be false.”25 To sustain a conviction for Medicaid fraud, the prosecution must therefore prove: (1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, 2020People v Ericksen, 288 Mich App 192, 201 ; 793 NW2d 120 (2010) (“Failing to advance a meritless argument or raise a futile objection does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”). 23 Wang, 503 Mich at 987. 24 MCL 400.601 et seq. 10 present or cause to be made or presented to an employee or officer of this state a claim under the social welfare act, 1939 PA 280 , MCL 400.1 to 400.119b, upon or against the state, knowing the claim to be false.”25 To sustain a conviction for Medicaid fraud, the prosecution must therefore prove: (1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, | 1 | 4 |
People v. Ericksengreen2 sentences2020People v Ericksen, 288 Mich App 192, 201 ; 793 NW2d 120 (2010) (“Failing to advance a meritless argument or raise a futile objection does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”). 23 Wang, 503 Mich at 987. 24 MCL 400.601 et seq. 10 present or cause to be made or presented to an employee or officer of this state a claim under the social welfare act, 1939 PA 280 , MCL 400.1 to 400.119b, upon or against the state, knowing the claim to be false.”25 To sustain a conviction for Medicaid fraud, the prosecution must therefore prove: (1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, 2020People v Ericksen, 288 Mich App 192, 201 ; 793 NW2d 120 (2010) (“Failing to advance a meritless argument or raise a futile objection does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”). 23 Wang, 503 Mich at 987. 24 MCL 400.601 et seq. 10 present or cause to be made or presented to an employee or officer of this state a claim under the social welfare act, 1939 PA 280 , MCL 400.1 to 400.119b, upon or against the state, knowing the claim to be false.”25 To sustain a conviction for Medicaid fraud, the prosecution must therefore prove: (1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Wayne County Prosecutor
green
2 sentences2020People v Ericksen, 288 Mich App 192, 201 ; 793 NW2d 120 (2010) (“Failing to advance a meritless argument or raise a futile objection does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”). 23 Wang, 503 Mich at 987. 24 MCL 400.601 et seq. 10 present or cause to be made or presented to an employee or officer of this state a claim under the social welfare act, 1939 PA 280 , MCL 400.1 to 400.119b, upon or against the state, knowing the claim to be false.”25 To sustain a conviction for Medicaid fraud, the prosecution must therefore prove: (1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, 2020People v Ericksen, 288 Mich App 192, 201 ; 793 NW2d 120 (2010) (“Failing to advance a meritless argument or raise a futile objection does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”). 23 Wang, 503 Mich at 987. 24 MCL 400.601 et seq. 10 present or cause to be made or presented to an employee or officer of this state a claim under the social welfare act, 1939 PA 280 , MCL 400.1 to 400.119b, upon or against the state, knowing the claim to be false.”25 To sustain a conviction for Medicaid fraud, the prosecution must therefore prove: (1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, | 3 | 1997–2020 |
People v. Kanaan
green
1 sentence2020In order to sustain a conviction under MCL 400.607(1), the prosecutor must prove five elements: “(1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, presents, or causes to be made or presented to the state or its agent, (3) the claim is made under the Social Welfare Act . . . , (4) the claim is false . . . , and (5) the accused knows the claim is false . . . .” [Kanaan, 278 Mich App at 619 , quoting People v Orzame, 224 Mich App 551, 558 ; 570 NW2d 118 (1997).] Defendant’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge centers on whether the prosecutor established the fifth element-- knowledge th | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Perez-DeLeon
green
2 sentences2020In order to sustain a conviction under MCL 400.607(1), the prosecutor must prove five elements: “(1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, presents, or causes to be made or presented to the state or its agent, (3) the claim is made under the Social Welfare Act . . . , (4) the claim is false . . . , and (5) the accused knows the claim is false . . . .” [Kanaan, 278 Mich App at 619 , quoting People v Orzame, 224 Mich App 551, 558 ; 570 NW2d 118 (1997).] Defendant’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge centers on whether the prosecutor established the fifth element-- knowledge th 2020In order to sustain a conviction under MCL 400.607(1), the prosecutor must prove five elements: “(1) the existence of a claim, (2) that the accused makes, presents, or causes to be made or presented to the state or its agent, (3) the claim is made under the Social Welfare Act . . . , (4) the claim is false . . . , and (5) the accused knows the claim is false . . . .” [Kanaan, 278 Mich App at 619 , quoting People v Orzame, 224 Mich App 551, 558 ; 570 NW2d 118 (1997).] Defendant’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge centers on whether the prosecutor established the fifth element-- knowledge th | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.