clear or obvious error in Michigan

2024“To avoid forfeiture under the plain-error rule, the proponent must establish that a clear or obvious error occurred and that the error affected substantial rights.” Id.

2023Under the plain-error rule, “the proponent must establish that a clear or obvious error occurred and that the error affected substantial rights.” Id.

2021Under plain-error review, it is the defendant who bears the burden of establishing that a clear or obvious error occurred, People v Jones, 468 Mich 345, 355 ; 662 NW2d 376 (2003), and defendant has not carried that burden in this instance.

2021Under plain-error review, it is the defendant who bears the burden of establishing that a clear or obvious error occurred, People v Jones, 468 Mich 345, 355 ; 662 NW2d 376 (2003), and defendant has not carried that burden in this instance.

2024Given that the requirements of the various evidentiary statutes and rules were not satisfied, and given that the prosecutor did not advance a persuasive or applicable argument below for admission of the evidence, we conclude that a clear or obvious error occurred when the evidence was introduced, Carines, 460 Mich at 763 , and that trial counsel acted below an objective standard of reasonableness by failing to object to it, Ackley, 497 Mich at 389 .

2020Carines, 460 Mich at 763 ; Ackley, 497 Mich at 389 .

2022“To avoid forfeiture under the plain-error rule, the proponent must establish that a clear or obvious error occurred and that the error affected substantial rights.” Id. “[A]n error affects substantial rights if it caused prejudice, i.e., it affected the outcome of the proceedings.” In re Utrera, 281 Mich App 1, 9 ; 761 NW2d 253 (2008).

2022“To avoid forfeiture under the plain-error rule, the proponent must establish that a clear or obvious error occurred and that the error affected substantial rights.” Id. “[A]n error affects substantial rights if it caused prejudice, i.e., it affected the outcome of the proceedings.” In re Utrera, 281 Mich App 1, 9 ; 761 NW2d 253 (2008).

2018All will not be of equal weight, but it is within the trial court's discretion, keeping in mind the appropriate legal and psychological principles to determine, on balance, whether the prosecution has carried its burden of proof. [Id. at 95-97 (citations omitted).] Determining whether there is an independent basis is a factual issue, and because this issue is unpreserved, we must examine whether defendant can demonstrate that admission of the victims’ in-court identifications arises to the level of a clear or obvious error, Jones, 468 Mich at 355 , and whether there is a reasonable probability

2018All will not be of equal weight, but it is within the trial court's discretion, keeping in mind the appropriate legal and psychological principles to determine, on balance, whether the prosecution has carried its burden of proof. [Id. at 95-97 (citations omitted).] Determining whether there is an independent basis is a factual issue, and because this issue is unpreserved, we must examine whether defendant can demonstrate that admission of the victims’ in-court identifications arises to the level of a clear or obvious error, Jones, 468 Mich at 355 , and whether there is a reasonable probability

2017This notion is incompatible with other constitutional provisions that contemplate the powers of the legislative branch,76 as well as a long line of case law—developed both before and after 1963—addressing the Legislature’s power to enact, amend, or repeal statutory law.77 Moreover, Harner’s interpretation of the phrase “general revision” in Const 1963, art 4, § 36 is at odds with this Court’s interpretation of that phrase as used in other constitutional 70 Vandenberg, 307 Mich App at 61 . 71 Id. 72 Id. (citation omitted). 73 Id. at 61-62 (citation and quotation marks omitted) (alteration in or

2017This notion is incompatible with other constitutional provisions that contemplate the powers of the legislative branch,76 as well as a long line of case law—developed both before and after 1963—addressing the Legislature’s power to enact, amend, or repeal statutory law.77 Moreover, Harner’s interpretation of the phrase “general revision” in Const 1963, art 4, § 36 is at odds with this Court’s interpretation of that phrase as used in other constitutional 70 Vandenberg, 307 Mich App at 61 . 71 Id. 72 Id. (citation omitted). 73 Id. at 61-62 (citation and quotation marks omitted) (alteration in or

2017This notion is incompatible with other constitutional provisions that contemplate the powers of the legislative branch,76 as well as a long line of case law—developed both before and after 1963—addressing the Legislature’s power to enact, amend, or repeal statutory law.77 Moreover, Harner’s interpretation of the phrase “general revision” in Const 1963, art 4, § 36 is at odds with this Court’s interpretation of that phrase as used in other constitutional 70 Vandenberg, 307 Mich App at 61 . 71 Id. 72 Id. (citation omitted). 73 Id. at 61-62 (citation and quotation marks omitted) (alteration in or

2017This notion is incompatible with other constitutional provisions that contemplate the powers of the legislative branch,76 as well as a long line of case law—developed both before and after 1963—addressing the Legislature’s power to enact, amend, or repeal statutory law.77 Moreover, Harner’s interpretation of the phrase “general revision” in Const 1963, art 4, § 36 is at odds with this Court’s interpretation of that phrase as used in other constitutional 70 Vandenberg, 307 Mich App at 61 . 71 Id. 72 Id. (citation omitted). 73 Id. at 61-62 (citation and quotation marks omitted) (alteration in or

2017Id.

2017Id.

2017People v Bosca, 310 Mich App 1, 47 ; 871 NW2d 307 (2015).6 This standard is met only if there has been a clear or obvious error that has affected the outcome of the proceedings below.

2017People v Bosca, 310 Mich App 1, 47 ; 871 NW2d 307 (2015).6 This standard is met only if there has been a clear or obvious error that has affected the outcome of the proceedings below.

2024Second, addressing defendant’s argument that the prosecutor impermissibly bolstered the informant’s credibility, “the prosecutor cannot vouch for the credibility of his witnesses to the effect that he has some special knowledge concerning a witness’ truthfulness.” Bahoda, 448 Mich at 276 .

2024Duncan, 402 Mich at 16 .

2023See People v Johnson, 315 Mich 163 , 198-199; 889 NW2d 513 (2016). 22 Restitution was ordered only once. 23 For example, in People v Cameron, 319 Mich App 215 , 231; 900 NW2d 658 (2017), the Court noted that court costs are concerned with “the . . . cost of a criminal case.” Again, there were two cases at issue here. 24 In addition, defendant does not in any way elaborate upon his brief statement about a defendant’s ability to pay. -23- Finally, in light of MCL 28.176(3), the prior taking of a DNA sample exempts defendant from having to pay for an additional assessment.

2023It is true that in People v Earl, 495 Mich 33, 41 ; 845 NW2d 721 (2014), the Court noted that the fee does not depend on the number of charges, but here there were two cases—one consisting of one charge and one consisting of three charges.

2023It is true that in People v Earl, 495 Mich 33, 41 ; 845 NW2d 721 (2014), the Court noted that the fee does not depend on the number of charges, but here there were two cases—one consisting of one charge and one consisting of three charges.

2022“A party may not take a position in the trial court and subsequently seek redress in an appellate court that is based on a position contrary to that taken in the trial court.” Holmes v Holmes, 281 Mich App 575, 587-588 ; 760 NW2d 300 (2008) (quotation marks omitted). -2- III.

2022“A party may not take a position in the trial court and subsequently seek redress in an appellate court that is based on a position contrary to that taken in the trial court.” Holmes v Holmes, 281 Mich App 575, 587-588 ; 760 NW2d 300 (2008) (quotation marks omitted). -2- III.

2022People v McNally, 470 Mich 1, 5 ; 679 NW2d 301 (2004); People v Posey, 334 Mich App 338 , 346; 964 NW2d 862 (2020).

2022People v McNally, 470 Mich 1, 5 ; 679 NW2d 301 (2004); People v Posey, 334 Mich App 338 , 346; 964 NW2d 862 (2020).

2022Id. at 427 .

2019Id.

2019Crawford, 541 US at 53-54 ; Davis, 547 US at 821 .

2019Crawford, 541 US at 53-54 ; Davis, 547 US at 821 .

2018VanDalen , 293 Mich. App. at 135 , 809 N.W.2d 412 . "[A]n error affects substantial rights if it caused prejudice, i.e., it affected the outcome of the proceedings." Utrera , 281 Mich. App. at 9 , 761 N.W.2d 253 .

2015Defendant relies on Knox, 469 Mich at 512-514 , in which our Supreme Court reversed felony murder and first-degree child abuse convictions based in part on the improper admission of evidence related to the victim’s prior injuries.