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.
13 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2026 7 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. Stevensgreen2 sentences2024See Stevens, 498 Mich at 177-178 (stating, “Depending on the circumstances, an immediate curative instruction may further alleviate any appearance of advocacy or partiality by the judge. 2022Depending on the circumstances, an immediate curative instruction may further alleviate any appearance of advocacy or partiality by the judge. [Stevens, 498 Mich at 177 .] However, there can be circumstances when a trial court so oversteps the bounds of judicial impartiality that an instruction will not alleviate or eliminate the appearance of partiality impressed upon the jury. | 4 | 9 |
Opper v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate 2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate | 2 | 2 |
Francis v. Franklingreen2 sentences2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate 2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate | 2 | 2 |
People v. Roscoegreen2 sentences2026See People v Roscoe, 303 Mich App 633, 649 ; 846 NW2d 402 (2014). -9- sentencing, in a motion for resentencing, or in a motion to remand for resentencing, they are all unpreserved and thus reviewed for plain error affecting substantial rights. 2026See People v Roscoe, 303 Mich App 633, 649 ; 846 NW2d 402 (2014). -9- sentencing, in a motion for resentencing, or in a motion to remand for resentencing, they are all unpreserved and thus reviewed for plain error affecting substantial rights. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Dennis
green
2 sentences2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate 2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Marshall v. Lonberger
green
2 sentences2021An immediate curative instruction tailored to address a specific error or instance of misconduct is often sufficient to ensure a fair trial,12 while some errors are too prejudicial to be cured by a jury instruction. 13 Thus, “ ‘we normally presume that a jury will follow an instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence inadvertently presented to it, unless there is an overwhelming probability that the jury will be unable to follow the court’s instructions, and a strong likelihood that the effect of the evidence would be devastating to the defendant.’ ”14 Stated differently, a curative instruc 2021An immediate curative instruction tailored to address a specific error or instance of misconduct is often sufficient to ensure a fair trial,12 while some errors are too prejudicial to be cured by a jury instruction. 13 Thus, “ ‘we normally presume that a jury will follow an instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence inadvertently presented to it, unless there is an overwhelming probability that the jury will be unable to follow the court’s instructions, and a strong likelihood that the effect of the evidence would be devastating to the defendant.’ ”14 Stated differently, a curative instruc | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Greer v. Miller
green
2 sentences2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate 2021Were this not so, it would be pointless for a trial court to instruct a jury, and even more pointless for an appellate court to reverse a criminal conviction because the jury was improperly instructed.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Opper v United States, 348 US 84, 95 (1954) (“Our theory of trial relies upon the ability of a jury to follow instructions.”). 12 See People v Stevens, 498 Mich 162, 177 (2015) (“Because it is well established that jurors are presumed to follow their instructions, a curative instruction will often ensure a fair trial despite minor or brief inappropriate | 2 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Crawford
green
2 sentences1991People v Crawford, 187 Mich App 344, 354 ; 467 NW2d 818 (1991); People v Wright (On Remand), 99 Mich App 801, 809 ; 298 NW2d 857 (1980). *513 Here, defendant’s objection to the prosecutor’s statement set forth above was sustained, and, although defense counsel did not seek an immediate curative instruction, the trial court instructed the jury at the close of the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument that it was "not to consider matters to which an objection was sustained or testimony or exhibits which were ordered stricken.” Thus, the jury was effectively instructed to disregard the improper argument 1991People v Crawford, 187 Mich App 344, 354 ; 467 NW2d 818 (1991); People v Wright (On Remand), 99 Mich App 801, 809 ; 298 NW2d 857 (1980). *513 Here, defendant’s objection to the prosecutor’s statement set forth above was sustained, and, although defense counsel did not seek an immediate curative instruction, the trial court instructed the jury at the close of the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument that it was "not to consider matters to which an objection was sustained or testimony or exhibits which were ordered stricken.” Thus, the jury was effectively instructed to disregard the improper argument | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Wright
green
2 sentences1991People v Crawford, 187 Mich App 344, 354 ; 467 NW2d 818 (1991); People v Wright (On Remand), 99 Mich App 801, 809 ; 298 NW2d 857 (1980). *513 Here, defendant’s objection to the prosecutor’s statement set forth above was sustained, and, although defense counsel did not seek an immediate curative instruction, the trial court instructed the jury at the close of the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument that it was "not to consider matters to which an objection was sustained or testimony or exhibits which were ordered stricken.” Thus, the jury was effectively instructed to disregard the improper argument 1991People v Crawford, 187 Mich App 344, 354 ; 467 NW2d 818 (1991); People v Wright (On Remand), 99 Mich App 801, 809 ; 298 NW2d 857 (1980). *513 Here, defendant’s objection to the prosecutor’s statement set forth above was sustained, and, although defense counsel did not seek an immediate curative instruction, the trial court instructed the jury at the close of the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument that it was "not to consider matters to which an objection was sustained or testimony or exhibits which were ordered stricken.” Thus, the jury was effectively instructed to disregard the improper argument | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Treece v. Greyhound Bus Co.
green
2 sentences1983Treece v Greyhound Bus Co, 63 Mich App 63, 66 ; 234 NW2d 404 (1975). 1983Treece v Greyhound Bus Co, 63 Mich App 63, 66 ; 234 NW2d 404 (1975). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
People v. Hill
green
2 sentences1975People v Quick, 58 Mich 321 ; 25 NW 302 (1885), People v Hill, 258 Mich 79 ; 241 NW 873 (1932). 1975People v Quick, 58 Mich 321 ; 25 NW 302 (1885), People v Hill, 258 Mich 79 ; 241 NW 873 (1932). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
People v. Quick
green
2 sentences1975People v Quick, 58 Mich 321 ; 25 NW 302 (1885), People v Hill, 258 Mich 79 ; 241 NW 873 (1932). 1975People v Quick, 58 Mich 321 ; 25 NW 302 (1885), People v Hill, 258 Mich 79 ; 241 NW 873 (1932). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.
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.