opportunity to cure error (Michigan) · Go Syfert
← Michigan issues

opportunity to cure error in Michigan

16 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2019 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Stanawaygreen
mich · 1994 · cited in 10 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 1996–2019
2 sentences

2017See People v Stanaway, 446 Mich 643, 687 ; 521 NW2d 557 (1994) (timely objection by counsel provides the trial court with an opportunity to cure error); See also People v Bahoda, 448 Mich 261, 280 ; 531 NW2d 659 (1995) (“[W]e do not deem this questioning error requiring reversal because the questioning was brief, was on redirect examination, and was in response to questioning that arguably required some attempt at rehabilitation.”).

2017See People v Stanaway, 446 Mich 643, 687 ; 521 NW2d 557 (1994) (timely objection by counsel provides the trial court with an opportunity to cure error); See also People v Bahoda, 448 Mich 261, 280 ; 531 NW2d 659 (1995) (“[W]e do not deem this questioning error requiring reversal because the questioning was brief, was on redirect examination, and was in response to questioning that arguably required some attempt at rehabilitation.”).

410
People v. Bahodagreen
mich · 1995 · cited in 2 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017See People v Stanaway, 446 Mich 643, 687 ; 521 NW2d 557 (1994) (timely objection by counsel provides the trial court with an opportunity to cure error); See also People v Bahoda, 448 Mich 261, 280 ; 531 NW2d 659 (1995) (“[W]e do not deem this questioning error requiring reversal because the questioning was brief, was on redirect examination, and was in response to questioning that arguably required some attempt at rehabilitation.”).

2017See People v Stanaway, 446 Mich 643, 687 ; 521 NW2d 557 (1994) (timely objection by counsel provides the trial court with an opportunity to cure error); See also People v Bahoda, 448 Mich 261, 280 ; 531 NW2d 659 (1995) (“[W]e do not deem this questioning error requiring reversal because the questioning was brief, was on redirect examination, and was in response to questioning that arguably required some attempt at rehabilitation.”).

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
People v. Ullah green
michctapp · 1996
2 sentences

2014“Appellate review of improper -3- prosecutorial remarks is generally precluded absent an objection because it deprives the trial court of an opportunity to cure the error.” People v Ullah, 216 Mich App 669, 679 ; 550 NW2d 568 (1996).

2014“Appellate review of improper -3- prosecutorial remarks is generally precluded absent an objection because it deprives the trial court of an opportunity to cure the error.” People v Ullah, 216 Mich App 669, 679 ; 550 NW2d 568 (1996).

21998–2014
People v. Messenger green
michctapp · 1997
2 sentences

1997Id.

1997Id.

21997–1997
People v. Bass green
michctapp · 1997
1 sentence

2018“Appellate review of prosecutorial remarks is generally precluded absent an objection because the trial court was deprived of an opportunity to cure the error.” People v Bass (On Rehearing), 223 Mich App 241, 246 ; 581 NW2d 1 (1997).

12018–2018
People v. Bass neutral
michctapp · 1997
2 sentences

2018“Appellate review of prosecutorial remarks is generally precluded absent an objection because the trial court was deprived of an opportunity to cure the error.” People v Bass (On Rehearing), 223 Mich App 241, 246 ; 581 NW2d 1 (1997).

2018However, “reversal is warranted in the absence of an objection if a curative instruction could not have eliminated the prejudicial effect of the remarks or where failure to review the issue would result in a miscarriage of justice.” Id.

12018–2018
People v. Gonzalez green
michctapp · 1989
2 sentences

1994People v Buckey, 424 Mich 1, 17 ; 378 NW2d 432 (1985); People v Gonzalez, 178 Mich App 526, 534-535 ; 444 NW2d 228 (1989); People v Gonyea, 126 Mich App 177, 189 ; 337 NW2d 325 (1983).

1994People v Buckey, 424 Mich 1, 17 ; 378 NW2d 432 (1985); People v Gonzalez, 178 Mich App 526, 534-535 ; 444 NW2d 228 (1989); People v Gonyea, 126 Mich App 177, 189 ; 337 NW2d 325 (1983).

11994–1994
People v. Gonyea green
michctapp · 1983
2 sentences

1994People v Buckey, 424 Mich 1, 17 ; 378 NW2d 432 (1985); People v Gonzalez, 178 Mich App 526, 534-535 ; 444 NW2d 228 (1989); People v Gonyea, 126 Mich App 177, 189 ; 337 NW2d 325 (1983).

1994People v Buckey, 424 Mich 1, 17 ; 378 NW2d 432 (1985); People v Gonzalez, 178 Mich App 526, 534-535 ; 444 NW2d 228 (1989); People v Gonyea, 126 Mich App 177, 189 ; 337 NW2d 325 (1983).

11994–1994
People v. Buckey green
mich · 1985
2 sentences

1994People v Buckey, 424 Mich 1, 17 ; 378 NW2d 432 (1985); People v Gonzalez, 178 Mich App 526, 534-535 ; 444 NW2d 228 (1989); People v Gonyea, 126 Mich App 177, 189 ; 337 NW2d 325 (1983).

1994People v Buckey, 424 Mich 1, 17 ; 378 NW2d 432 (1985); People v Gonzalez, 178 Mich App 526, 534-535 ; 444 NW2d 228 (1989); People v Gonyea, 126 Mich App 177, 189 ; 337 NW2d 325 (1983).

11994–1994

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227b (6) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.10 (6) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.520b (5) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 769.12 (4) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224f (3) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.349 (3) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.520c (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 45 (1988–2023) MI 16 (1994–2019) FL 7 (2000–2023) OK 7 (2000–2007) NY 6 (1980–2014) IL 4 (1992–2021) WA 3 (2022–2025) PA 2 (2020–2025) NM 2 (1989–2006) AZ 2 (1981–2015) VT 2 (2008–2013) IN 2 (2025–2025) CA 2 (2020–2026) KY 2 (2024–2025) OR 2 (2023–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check