lesser standard in Michigan

2025If it did, why would we ever start by considering the lesser standard? 14 People v Jenkins, 472 Mich 26, 32 ; 691 NW2d 759 (2005), citing Terry, 392 US at 22 . 15 Id. 16 People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996). 7 who is in a motor vehicle if the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity.” 17 The trial court and the Court of Appeals both erred by failing to consider whether the police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified an investigatory Terry stop, during which they discovered the illegal ha

2025If it did, why would we ever start by considering the lesser standard? 14 People v Jenkins, 472 Mich 26, 32 ; 691 NW2d 759 (2005), citing Terry, 392 US at 22 . 15 Id. 16 People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996). 7 who is in a motor vehicle if the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity.” 17 The trial court and the Court of Appeals both erred by failing to consider whether the police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified an investigatory Terry stop, during which they discovered the illegal ha

2025If it did, why would we ever start by considering the lesser standard? 14 People v Jenkins, 472 Mich 26, 32 ; 691 NW2d 759 (2005), citing Terry, 392 US at 22 . 15 Id. 16 People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996). 7 who is in a motor vehicle if the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity.” 17 The trial court and the Court of Appeals both erred by failing to consider whether the police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified an investigatory Terry stop, during which they discovered the illegal ha

2025If it did, why would we ever start by considering the lesser standard? 14 People v Jenkins, 472 Mich 26, 32 ; 691 NW2d 759 (2005), citing Terry, 392 US at 22 . 15 Id. 16 People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996). 7 who is in a motor vehicle if the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity.” 17 The trial court and the Court of Appeals both erred by failing to consider whether the police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified an investigatory Terry stop, during which they discovered the illegal ha

2025If it did, why would we ever start by considering the lesser standard? 14 People v Jenkins, 472 Mich 26, 32 ; 691 NW2d 759 (2005), citing Terry, 392 US at 22 . 15 Id. 16 People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996). 7 who is in a motor vehicle if the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity.” 17 The trial court and the Court of Appeals both erred by failing to consider whether the police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified an investigatory Terry stop, during which they discovered the illegal ha

2025If it did, why would we ever start by considering the lesser standard? 14 People v Jenkins, 472 Mich 26, 32 ; 691 NW2d 759 (2005), citing Terry, 392 US at 22 . 15 Id. 16 People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996). 7 who is in a motor vehicle if the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity.” 17 The trial court and the Court of Appeals both erred by failing to consider whether the police officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that justified an investigatory Terry stop, during which they discovered the illegal ha

2024Pierron v Pierron, 486 Mich 81, 89-90 ; 782 NW2d 480 (2010).

2024Pierron v Pierron, 486 Mich 81, 89-90 ; 782 NW2d 480 (2010).

2022Davenport v Grosse Pointe Farms Zoning Bd, 210 Mich App 400, 405-406 ; 534 NW2d 143 (1995) (Courts “must give due deference to the agency’s regulatory expertise and may not ‘invade the province of exclusive administrative fact finding by displacing an agency’s choice between two reasonably differing views.’ ”). 1 Evidence indicated that approximately 85% of the planes utilizing the airport were VFR flights. 2 Importantly, the airport zoning board has a lesser standard when it comes to concerns for hazards than does the FAA.

2022Davenport v Grosse Pointe Farms Zoning Bd, 210 Mich App 400, 405-406 ; 534 NW2d 143 (1995) (Courts “must give due deference to the agency’s regulatory expertise and may not ‘invade the province of exclusive administrative fact finding by displacing an agency’s choice between two reasonably differing views.’ ”). 1 Evidence indicated that approximately 85% of the planes utilizing the airport were VFR flights. 2 Importantly, the airport zoning board has a lesser standard when it comes to concerns for hazards than does the FAA.

2018“Because the effect of a partial closure does not reach the level of total closure, only a substantial, rather than a compelling, reason for the closure is necessary.” People v Kline, 197 Mich App 165, 170 ; 494 NW2d 756 (1992). 1 “A partial closure occurs where the public is only partially excluded, such as when family members or the press are allowed to remain, or when the closure order is narrowly tailored to specific needs.” People v Kline, 197 Mich App 165 , 170 n 2; 494 NW2d 756 (1992) (citations omitted). -2- Here, the trial court identified a substantial interest to be protected.

2018“Because the effect of a partial closure does not reach the level of total closure, only a substantial, rather than a compelling, reason for the closure is necessary.” People v Kline, 197 Mich App 165, 170 ; 494 NW2d 756 (1992). 1 “A partial closure occurs where the public is only partially excluded, such as when family members or the press are allowed to remain, or when the closure order is narrowly tailored to specific needs.” People v Kline, 197 Mich App 165 , 170 n 2; 494 NW2d 756 (1992) (citations omitted). -2- Here, the trial court identified a substantial interest to be protected.

2018Coblentz v City of Novi, 475 Mich 558, 572 ; 719 NW2d 73 (2006).

2018Coblentz v City of Novi, 475 Mich 558, 572 ; 719 NW2d 73 (2006).

2017Id.

2017Id.

2010In People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996), our Supreme Court, citing United States v Sokolow, 490 US 1 ; 109 S Ct 1581 ; 104 L Ed 2d 1 (1989), noted, “Reasonable suspicion entails something more than an inchoate or unparticularized suspicion or ‘hunch,’ but less than the level of suspicion required for probable cause.” An anonymous tip can provide reasonable suspicion if it is considered along with a “totality of the circumstances” that shows the tip to be reliable.

2010In People v Champion, 452 Mich 92, 98 ; 549 NW2d 849 (1996), our Supreme Court, citing United States v Sokolow, 490 US 1 ; 109 S Ct 1581 ; 104 L Ed 2d 1 (1989), noted, “Reasonable suspicion entails something more than an inchoate or unparticularized suspicion or ‘hunch,’ but less than the level of suspicion required for probable cause.” An anonymous tip can provide reasonable suspicion if it is considered along with a “totality of the circumstances” that shows the tip to be reliable.

2024This Court rejected defendant’s claim that he was prejudiced by the failure to hold a preliminary examination because that contention “ignore[d] the jury verdict.” Id. “[B]ecause defendant’s conviction was based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, this Court can surmise that had a preliminary examination been conducted, as defendant argued for here, defendant would have been bound over to circuit court for trial since the lesser standard of probable cause is used at [a] preliminary examination.” Id. (quotation marks, citation, and alteration omitted).

2024This Court rejected defendant’s claim that he was prejudiced by the failure to hold a preliminary examination because that contention “ignore[d] the jury verdict.” Id. “[B]ecause defendant’s conviction was based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, this Court can surmise that had a preliminary examination been conducted, as defendant argued for here, defendant would have been bound over to circuit court for trial since the lesser standard of probable cause is used at [a] preliminary examination.” Id. (quotation marks, citation, and alteration omitted).

2020Although the lesser standard of probable cause allows for a magistrate to “legitimately find probable cause while personally entertaining some reservations regarding guilt[,]” all evidence presented by the prosecution must allow “a person of ordinary prudence and caution” to entertain “a reasonable belief of the accused’s guilt.” Anderson, 501 Mich at 188 .

2019Defendant does not raise this issue on appeal, and we address it only to provide background and context for the arguments raised. -2- considered defendant’s motion under the lesser standard set forth in Shade v Wright, 291 Mich App 17 ; 805 NW2d 1 (2010), for analysis of a motion to modify parenting time, defendant still had not shown proper cause or a change in circumstances.

2019Defendant does not raise this issue on appeal, and we address it only to provide background and context for the arguments raised. -2- considered defendant’s motion under the lesser standard set forth in Shade v Wright, 291 Mich App 17 ; 805 NW2d 1 (2010), for analysis of a motion to modify parenting time, defendant still had not shown proper cause or a change in circumstances.

2016Importantly, respondent’s argument ignores that the trial court needed to find by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds existed to terminate her parental rights, VanDalen, 293 Mich App at 139 , but it only needed to find by a preponderance of the evidence—a lesser standard—that termination was in the child’s best interests, Moss, 301 Mich App at 90 .

2016Importantly, respondent’s argument ignores that the trial court needed to find by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds existed to terminate her parental rights, VanDalen, 293 Mich App at 139 , but it only needed to find by a preponderance of the evidence—a lesser standard—that termination was in the child’s best interests, Moss, 301 Mich App at 90 .

2015Id. at 599 .

2015Id. at 599 .