Charles Levin

In People v. LoCicero, the defendants were charged with drug possession offenses after police stopped their vehicle based on observations of two cars meeting in parking lots, one passenger briefly walking around and looking about, and a short conversation between occupants, leading to the discovery of marijuana, cocaine, and other items. The district and circuit courts dismissed the charges and suppressed the evidence, finding the stop lacked reasonable suspicion under Terry v. Ohio. The Court of Appeals had reversed that ruling. The Michigan Supreme Court reversed, holding that the officers' observations amounted to no more than an inchoate hunch rather than a reasonably articulable suspicion of criminal activity under the totality of circumstances, violating the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable seizures, and that the evidence obtained must therefore be suppressed.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

This case concerned whether the Oakland County Probate Court abused its discretion in denying a prosecutor's motion to waive jurisdiction over defendant Joseph Dale Fultz to circuit court for trial as an adult. Fultz faced charges of first-degree criminal sexual conduct allegedly committed at age sixteen against his seven-year-old niece, though proceedings began after he turned twenty-three and was no longer eligible for juvenile facilities. The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and probate court, ordering waiver of jurisdiction, and adopted the Court of Appeals dissent's view that the seriousness of the alleged offense and the interests of public welfare and security required transfer despite Fultz's age and lack of subsequent criminal activity.

criminal lawprocedure

In People v. Dye, the defendant was convicted after three trials of first-degree premeditated murder, second-degree murder, and felony firearm possession for the 1982 shooting deaths of two women at a motorcycle club, with the prosecution relying on testimony from immunized witnesses and forensic evidence about blood patterns while the defense claimed another club member committed the crimes. The Michigan Supreme Court denied the delayed application for leave to appeal, dismissed the complaint for superintending control and related stay motion as moot, and stated it was not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by the Court. Justice Levin dissented and would have granted leave, highlighting potential issues such as the admission of the defendant's statements about a prior firebombing despite a Miranda waiver agreement, the prosecutor's use of prearrest silence to impeach the defendant's story, and the trial court's delayed ruling on a discovery violation involving a victim's address book that affected credibility in what was essentially a contest between the defendant and an immunized witness.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a dispute over whether a land contract vendee had timely redeemed the property within the statutory ninety-day period following a forfeiture judgment by tendering payment through a title company conditional on receiving a simultaneous conveyance of title and lien discharges from the vendor. The Michigan Supreme Court denied the motion for rehearing of its earlier decision, which had concluded that the vendee failed to redeem because the statute requires unconditional payment without conditioning it on conveyance. The court's reasoning centered on the statutory language requiring payment within the redemption period, the lack of any fraud that might excuse tender, and the absence of an explicit statutory mandate for simultaneous conveyance, even though the underlying land contract obligated the vendor to convey upon full payment.

property

In this workers' compensation case, Victoria Lawrence was injured at her job with Prompt Answering/DeBonte Electric, which prevented her from continuing that work, but she was able to keep her part-time seasonal job selling movie tickets at Plainfield Drive-In. The Michigan Supreme Court addressed whether wages from both jobs should be combined to calculate her average weekly wage for benefit purposes, whether she lost earning capacity from the second job, and whether the Second Injury Fund could be liable for a portion of benefits. The court ruled that the 1980 amendments to the Worker's Disability Compensation Act require including wages from all employments in the average weekly wage calculation. It further held that the Second Injury Fund has no reimbursement liability for benefits replacing wages from the injured employment, even if the worker continues the other job, and remanded the earning capacity question as a factual issue for the magistrate.

labor & employment

The case involved a dispute over workers' compensation benefits for Harry Quinton, who had received an open award for a pre-1982 work-related disability from General Motors; after the 1981 addition of coordination provisions in § 354, benefits were reduced starting in 1982, a ruling upheld on remand from Franks v. White Pine Copper Div. following this Court's 1985 decision that § 354 applied retroactively. The question was whether 1987 legislation amending § 354 to bar such coordination for pre-March 31, 1982 injuries could apply despite the prior Franks-based adjudication, or whether separation of powers barred retroactive legislative override of that ruling. The Court held that the 1987 amendments apply to all workers injured before that date regardless of any prior Franks adjudication. The core reasoning was that only benefits reduced to final judgment before the 1987 enactment are exempt from the new provisions, and the WCAB order here did not qualify as such a protected final judgment.

labor & employmentprocedure