four-step analysis (Michigan) · Go Syfert
← Michigan issues

four-step analysis in Michigan

11 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2026 3 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
United States v. Hal M. Atchleygreen
ca6 · 2007 · cited in 1 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019The court employed a four- step analysis to determine the probative value of the flight: [T]he probative value of flight evidence depends upon the degree of confidence with which four inferences can be drawn: (1) from the defendant’s behavior to flight; (2) from flight to consciousness of guilt; (3) from consciousness of guilt to consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged; and (4) from consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged to actual guilt of the crime charged. [Id. at 591, quoting United States v Atchley, 474 F3d 840, 853 (CA 6, 2007).] The court held “that suicidal idea

11
Trojan v. Township of Taylorgreen
mich · 1958 · cited in 1 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990
2 sentences

1990See Trojan v Taylor Twp, 352 Mich 636, 638-639 ; 91 NW2d 9 (1958). 50 The record demonstrates that the dss has developed a four-step test as an alternative to Rule 104: First, [t]he Department would look to a long list of accrediting agencies, including the American Association of Bible Colleges to see if any of those organizations recognized the college in question.

1990See Trojan v Taylor Twp, 352 Mich 636, 638-639 ; 91 NW2d 9 (1958). 50 The record demonstrates that the dss has developed a four-step test as an alternative to Rule 104: First, [t]he Department would look to a long list of accrediting agencies, including the American Association of Bible Colleges to see if any of those organizations recognized the college in question.

11

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 (8)

CaseCitedYears
Sulaica v. Rometty green
michctapp · 2014
2 sentences

2026Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-582 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014).

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

32017–2026
Rains v. Rains green
michctapp · 2013
2 sentences

2022Next, the court stated that it was following the four-step framework set forth in Rains v Rains, 301 Mich App 313, 325 ; 836 NW2d 709 (2013), for analyzing a motion for a change of domicile.

2022Next, the court stated that it was following the four-step framework set forth in Rains v Rains, 301 Mich App 313, 325 ; 836 NW2d 709 (2013), for analyzing a motion for a change of domicile.

22022–2022
Spires v. Bergman green
michctapp · 2007
2 sentences

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

22017–2017
People v. VanderVliet green
mich · 1993
2 sentences

2017VanderVliet, 444 Mich at 74 .

2017VanderVliet, 444 Mich at 74 .

22017–2017
Braverman v. GARDEN CITY HOSPITAL green
mich · 2007
2 sentences

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

22017–2017
Brown v. Loveman green
michctapp · 2004
2 sentences

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

2017It is true that this Court stated in Brown v Loveman, 260 Mich App 576 , 598 n 7; 680 NW2d 432 (2004)—and in cases issued after Brown, see, e.g., Spires v Bergman, 276 Mich App 432 , 437 n 1; 741 NW2d 523 (2007), and Sulaica v Rometty, 308 Mich App 568, 581-583 ; 866 NW2d 838 (2014)—that it is “[o]nly when the parents share joint physical custody” that a best- interest analysis must be completed.

22017–2017
People v. Knox green
mich · 2004
2 sentences

2020The Michigan Supreme Court in People v Knox, 469 Mich 502, 509 ; 674 NW2d 366 (2004), set out a four-step analysis for determining when to allow evidence of a defendant’s prior convictions: First, the prosecutor must offer the “prior bad acts” evidence under something other than a character or propensity theory.

2020The Michigan Supreme Court in People v Knox, 469 Mich 502, 509 ; 674 NW2d 366 (2004), set out a four-step analysis for determining when to allow evidence of a defendant’s prior convictions: First, the prosecutor must offer the “prior bad acts” evidence under something other than a character or propensity theory.

12020–2020
Stokes v. CHRYSLER LLC green
mich · 2008
1 sentence

2016These statutory requirements form the basis of the four-step analysis set forth in Stokes, 481 Mich at 281-283 .

12016–2016

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.23 (5) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.31 (5) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.27 (3) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.28 (3) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227b (3) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.316 (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

FL 41 (1982–2024) KS 19 (1995–2026) WA 13 (1995–2025) MI 11 (1990–2026) OR 11 (2003–2016) PA 9 (1983–2022) MO 9 (2006–2023) NJ 7 (1996–2024) LA 7 (1994–2010) TN 7 (2001–2024) CO 6 (1990–2026) KY 5 (2010–2016) CA 5 (1982–2014) NY 5 (1984–2010) IA 3 (1974–2009) OH 2 (2003–2010) NC 2 (2005–2026) MD 2 (2000–2000) DE 2 (2023–2024) IL 2 (1975–2020) VA 2 (2003–2020) WV 2 (1996–2014) IN 2 (1991–2003) NV 2 (1995–2014)

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