during defendant in Michigan

2023A plea that is not voluntary and understanding because of a defect in the process “ ‘violates the state and federal Due Process Clauses.’ ” People v Blanton, 317 Mich App 107, 119 ; 894 NW2d 613 (2016), quoting People v Brown, 492 Mich 684, 699 ; 822 NW2d 208 (2012).

2023A plea that is not voluntary and understanding because of a defect in the process “ ‘violates the state and federal Due Process Clauses.’ ” People v Blanton, 317 Mich App 107, 119 ; 894 NW2d 613 (2016), quoting People v Brown, 492 Mich 684, 699 ; 822 NW2d 208 (2012).

2023A plea that is not voluntary and understanding because of a defect in the process “ ‘violates the state and federal Due Process Clauses.’ ” People v Blanton, 317 Mich App 107, 119 ; 894 NW2d 613 (2016), quoting People v Brown, 492 Mich 684, 699 ; 822 NW2d 208 (2012).

2023A plea that is not voluntary and understanding because of a defect in the process “ ‘violates the state and federal Due Process Clauses.’ ” People v Blanton, 317 Mich App 107, 119 ; 894 NW2d 613 (2016), quoting People v Brown, 492 Mich 684, 699 ; 822 NW2d 208 (2012).

2025Getting money from you for sex.” During defendant’s incarceration, he obtained his GED, was accepted into the Calvin University Initiative program, received a bachelor’s degree from Calvin University, and received glowing reviews and recommendations from numerous corrections staff. -2- Almost 20 years after defendant was sentenced to mandatory LWOP, the United States Supreme Court held in Miller v Alabama, 567 US 460, 479 ; 132 S Ct 2455 ; 183 L Ed 2d 407 (2012), that such sentences when imposed on defendants who were minors at the time they committed their crimes are unconstitutional as cruel

2025Getting money from you for sex.” During defendant’s incarceration, he obtained his GED, was accepted into the Calvin University Initiative program, received a bachelor’s degree from Calvin University, and received glowing reviews and recommendations from numerous corrections staff. -2- Almost 20 years after defendant was sentenced to mandatory LWOP, the United States Supreme Court held in Miller v Alabama, 567 US 460, 479 ; 132 S Ct 2455 ; 183 L Ed 2d 407 (2012), that such sentences when imposed on defendants who were minors at the time they committed their crimes are unconstitutional as cruel

2024During defendant’s hearing under People v Ginther, 390 Mich 436, 443 ; 212 NW2d 922 (1973), the trial court found that defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to make a timely request for a jury instruction regarding the definition of “reasonable force.” It reasoned that the instructions, as given, fairly presented the issues to be tried to the jury and that there was no basis to find that counsel provided ineffective assistance.

2024During defendant’s hearing under People v Ginther, 390 Mich 436, 443 ; 212 NW2d 922 (1973), the trial court found that defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to make a timely request for a jury instruction regarding the definition of “reasonable force.” It reasoned that the instructions, as given, fairly presented the issues to be tried to the jury and that there was no basis to find that counsel provided ineffective assistance.

2024“Arbitrators exceed their power when they ‘act beyond the material terms of the contract from which they primarily draw their authority, or in contravention of 5 The contracts also contained a savings clause stating that “[i]n the event any provision of this Agreement shall be unenforceable, then such provision shall be deemed deleted, but shall not invalidate the remaining provisions of this Agreement”, which defendant’s counsel alerted the court to during the hearing on its motion for summary disposition and to compel arbitration. -5- controlling principles of law.’ ” Saveski, 261 Mich App a

2024“Arbitrators exceed their power when they ‘act beyond the material terms of the contract from which they primarily draw their authority, or in contravention of 5 The contracts also contained a savings clause stating that “[i]n the event any provision of this Agreement shall be unenforceable, then such provision shall be deemed deleted, but shall not invalidate the remaining provisions of this Agreement”, which defendant’s counsel alerted the court to during the hearing on its motion for summary disposition and to compel arbitration. -5- controlling principles of law.’ ” Saveski, 261 Mich App a

2024“Arbitrators exceed their power when they ‘act beyond the material terms of the contract from which they primarily draw their authority, or in contravention of 5 The contracts also contained a savings clause stating that “[i]n the event any provision of this Agreement shall be unenforceable, then such provision shall be deemed deleted, but shall not invalidate the remaining provisions of this Agreement”, which defendant’s counsel alerted the court to during the hearing on its motion for summary disposition and to compel arbitration. -5- controlling principles of law.’ ” Saveski, 261 Mich App a

2024I didn’t want to draw attention to it.” In its decision on defendant’s motion for a new trial, the trial court began by acknowledging that, pursuant to Swint, 225 Mich App at 379 , a “defendant may offer to stipulate to the fact that he has a felony conviction that would otherwise preclude his possession of a firearm, and a Court is bound to accept that stipulation.” The trial court concluded that, however, Swint “does not require that such a stipulation be made.” The trial court stated that “[t]here is no evidence provided that any juror used the other information on the judgment for any impr

2022Parties “may not now expand the record on appeal,” People v Nix, 301 Mich App 195, 203 ; 836 NW2d 224 (2013), and they specifically “cannot enlarge the record on appeal by the use of affidavits,” People v Williams, 241 Mich App 519 , 524 n1; 616 NW2d 710 (2000).

2022Parties “may not now expand the record on appeal,” People v Nix, 301 Mich App 195, 203 ; 836 NW2d 224 (2013), and they specifically “cannot enlarge the record on appeal by the use of affidavits,” People v Williams, 241 Mich App 519 , 524 n1; 616 NW2d 710 (2000).

2022MCR 6.302(A) requires a trial court conducting a plea hearing to “place the defendant or defendants under oath and personally carry out subrules (B)-(E).” MCR 6.302(B)(2) states what information a trial court must provide regarding defendant’s possible sentence, including “the maximum possible prison sentence for the offense and any mandatory minimum sentence required by law, including a 4 People v Cole, 491 Mich 325 ; 817 NW2d 497 (2012). -4- requirement for mandatory lifetime electronic monitoring under MCL 750.520b or 750.520c[.]” During defendant’s plea hearing, the trial court informed de

2022MCR 6.302(A) requires a trial court conducting a plea hearing to “place the defendant or defendants under oath and personally carry out subrules (B)-(E).” MCR 6.302(B)(2) states what information a trial court must provide regarding defendant’s possible sentence, including “the maximum possible prison sentence for the offense and any mandatory minimum sentence required by law, including a 4 People v Cole, 491 Mich 325 ; 817 NW2d 497 (2012). -4- requirement for mandatory lifetime electronic monitoring under MCL 750.520b or 750.520c[.]” During defendant’s plea hearing, the trial court informed de

2022Parties “may not now expand the record on appeal,” People v Nix, 301 Mich App 195, 203 ; 836 NW2d 224 (2013), and they specifically “cannot enlarge the record on appeal by the use of affidavits,” People v Williams, 241 Mich App 519 , 524 n1; 616 NW2d 710 (2000).

2022Parties “may not now expand the record on appeal,” People v Nix, 301 Mich App 195, 203 ; 836 NW2d 224 (2013), and they specifically “cannot enlarge the record on appeal by the use of affidavits,” People v Williams, 241 Mich App 519 , 524 n1; 616 NW2d 710 (2000).

2021Bonkowski, 281 Mich App at 170 . -8- defendant’s recitation of the facts—indeed, the trial court stated on the record its belief that plaintiff had satisfied the first two elements of a prima facie case of retaliation, despite defendant’s arguments to the contrary.

2020“When calculating the sentencing guidelines, a sentencing court may consider all record evidence, including the contents of a PSIR [presentence investigation report], plea admissions, and testimony presented at a preliminary examination.” People v McFarlane, 325 Mich App 507, 532 ; 6 People v Atkins, unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered November 14, 2019 (Docket No. 347631) 7 During defendant’s sentencing hearing, defense counsel objected to the trial court’s assessment of 10 points for OV 9, but made no objection to the scores for OV 4 or OV 10.

2015People v Harverson, 291 Mich App 171, 175 ; 804 NW2d 757 (2010).

2015People v Harverson, 291 Mich App 171, 175 ; 804 NW2d 757 (2010).

2015Missouri v Frye, __ U S__; 132 S Ct 1399, 1408 ; 182 L Ed 2d 379 (2012); People v Corteway, 212 Mich App 442, 446 ; 538 NW2d 60 (1995).

2015Missouri v Frye, __ U S__; 132 S Ct 1399, 1408 ; 182 L Ed 2d 379 (2012); People v Corteway, 212 Mich App 442, 446 ; 538 NW2d 60 (1995).

2015Missouri v Frye, __ U S__; 132 S Ct 1399, 1408 ; 182 L Ed 2d 379 (2012); People v Corteway, 212 Mich App 442, 446 ; 538 NW2d 60 (1995).

2015Missouri v Frye, __ U S__; 132 S Ct 1399, 1408 ; 182 L Ed 2d 379 (2012); People v Corteway, 212 Mich App 442, 446 ; 538 NW2d 60 (1995).

2007The dissent also suggests that I am ignoring the import of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 , 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993).

2007The dissent also suggests that I am ignoring the import of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 , 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993).

1994Spinks, supra at 561-565 .

1993During defendant’s motion for a new trial, however, the trial court held that its earlier ruling was an error of "constitutional dimension,” on the basis of Davis v Alaska, 415 US 308 ; 94 S Ct 1105 ; 39 L Ed 2d 347 (1974).

1993During defendant’s motion for a new trial, however, the trial court held that its earlier ruling was an error of "constitutional dimension,” on the basis of Davis v Alaska, 415 US 308 ; 94 S Ct 1105 ; 39 L Ed 2d 347 (1974).

1966In re Rudnik (1952), 333 Mich 216 , and In re McLeod (1957), 348 Mich 434 , are illustrative of the particularity with which the Supreme Court has dealt with the matter of service of a statement of the charges.

1966In re Rudnik (1952), 333 Mich 216 , and In re McLeod (1957), 348 Mich 434 , are illustrative of the particularity with which the Supreme Court has dealt with the matter of service of a statement of the charges.