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.
10 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2025 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Rodriguezgreen2 sentences2018See People v Rodriguez, 463 Mich 466, 474 ; 620 NW2d 13 (2000). 2018See People v Rodriguez, 463 Mich 466, 474 ; 620 NW2d 13 (2000). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Feezelgreen1 sentence2024See Feezel, 486 Mich at 192 .3 2 The Michigan Rules of Evidence were substantially amended on September 20, 2023, effective January 1, 2024. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Sollowaygreen1 sentence2019See Solloway, 316 Mich App at 188 (a defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must establish an outcome determinative error constituting prejudice). | 1 | 1 |
Holt v. Peoplegreen2 sentences2008The majority further opines that “[t]he burden is on the defendant to establish that the juror was not impartial. . . .” Ante at 550, citing Holt v People, 13 Mich 224, 228 (1865). 2008The majority further opines that "[t]he burden is on the defendant to establish that the juror was not impartial...." Ante at 857, citing Holt v. People, 13 Mich. 224, 228 (1865). | 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. Lukity
green
2 sentences2025In this case, we consider whether the trial court’s failure to admit defendant’s testimony that her partner threatened to kill her was more probably than not an outcome- determinative error under People v Lukity, 460 Mich 484 ; 596 NW2d 607 (1999). 2025In this case, we consider whether the trial court’s failure to admit defendant’s testimony that her partner threatened to kill her was more probably than not an outcome- determinative error under People v Lukity, 460 Mich 484 ; 596 NW2d 607 (1999). | 2 | 2000–2025 |
Barnett v. Hidalgo
green
1 sentence2024Id. at ___; slip op at 5. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Douglas
green
1 sentence2019As a result of the court’s error, however, the prosecution was not limited to this evidence, and instead the jury was permitted to hear from KD twice more: first, through the hearsay testimony offered by Wheeler, and then again through the video recording of KD’s forensic interview. [Douglas, 496 Mich at 580 .] Relying on Douglas, Corridore argues that defense counsel’s complicity in the admission of repetitive hearsay was an outcome-determinative error. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Woolfolk
green
1 sentence2016It follows that counsel did not commit an outcome-determinative error in failing to object or move to suppress Wilder’s identification.2 See Woolfolk, 304 Mich App at 457-458 . 2 Defendant also points out that defense counsel did not question Lamar regarding his failure to identify anyone in a photographic lineup. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.