[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: PLEASE RESPOND: Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee E-Vote Request



I support #1

I oppose #2

 

From: Carrie Sharlow [mailto:CSHARLOW@mail.michbar.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 11:17 AM
To: Frederick Neumark; Julie Powell; John Livesay; John Freeman; Gretchen Schlaff; James Heath; Richmond Riggs; Fred Bell; Ryan Berman; Haytham Faraj; Scott Sanford; John Jarema
Subject: PLEASE RESPOND: Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee E-Vote Request

 



 

 

Carrie A. Sharlow

Administrative Assistant, Governmental Relations

 


State Bar of Michigan

Michael Franck Building

306 Townsend Street

Lansing, MI  48933

P: 517-346-6317  

F: 517-482-6248

 

>>> Carrie Sharlow 10/27/2011 9:23 AM >>>

Dear Committee Members:

 

Please respond with your vote by 4 PM on Monday, October 31st

 

As to each motion, your voting choices are:

 A.  Support the Motion;    B. Oppose the Motion;     C.    Abstain.

 

1.     2010-14 - Proposed Adoption of New Rule 6.202 of the Michigan Court Rules

 

MOTION:

Motion for Reconsideration.

The Criminal Law Section voted to support the alternative language proposed by our CJaP committee as to MCR 6.202 with some changes.   The concerns expressed by the Criminal Law Section were that the proposed court rule should apply to all trials in the district, probate and circuit court and that there should be a good cause exception to allow rescission of the otherwise assumed waiver of a defendantâs rights under the Confrontation Clause.  The other concerns were that this court rule not circumvent the prosecutorâs mandatory obligation to furnish forensic reports to the defense or allow courts to admit evidence in violation of the Confrontation Clause.  The same utilizes our work plus some legitimate changes made by the Section. 

 

Judge Hoort moves, Gretchen Schlaff seconds, that we reconsider the above committee motion and support the concept of the proposed rule change by the Supreme Court with the amendments recommended by the Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee and the Criminal Law Section, using the following language:

 

Rule 6.202. Disclosure of Forensic Laboratory Report and Certificate; Applicability; Admissibility of Report and Certificate; Extension of Time; Adjournment.

(A) This rule shall apply to trials in the District, Probate and Circuit Court.

(B) (A) Disclosure. Upon receipt of a forensic laboratory report and certificate by the examining expert, the prosecutor shall a party may serve a copy of the laboratory report and certificate on the opposing party's attorney, or party if not represented by an attorney, within 14 days after receipt of the laboratory report and certificate. A proof of service of the report and certificate on the opposing party's attorney, or party if not represented by an attorney, shall be filed with the court.

(C) (B) Notice and Demand.

(1) Notice. If a party intends to offer the report as evidence at trial, the party's attorney or party, if not represented by an attorney, shall provide the opposing party's attorney, or party if not represented by an attorney, with Notice of that fact in writing when the report is served as provided in subrule (B) (A)(1). The analyst who conducts the analysis on the forensic sample and signs the report shall complete a certificate on which the analyst shall state (i) that he or she is qualified by education, training, and experience to perform the analysis, (ii) the name and location of the laboratory where the analysis was performed, (iii) that performing the analysis is part of his or her regular duties, and (iv) that the tests were performed under industry-approved procedures or standards and the report accurately reflects the analyst's findings and opinions regarding the results of those tests or analysis. Except as provided in subrule (C)(2), (B)(2), the report and certification is admissible in evidence to the same effect as if the person who performed the analysis or examination had personally testified.

(2) Demand. Upon receipt of a copy of the laboratory report and certificate, the opposing party's attorney, or party if not represented by an attorney, may file a written objection to the use of the laboratory report and certificate. The written objection shall be filed with the court in which the matter is pending, and shall be served on the opposing party's attorney or party if not represented by an attorney within 14 days of receipt of the Notice. If a written objection is filed, the report and certificate are not admissible except as otherwise allowed by law. If no objections is made to the use of the laboratory report and certificate within the time allowed by this section, the report and certificate are admissible in evidence as provided in subrule (C)(1). (B)(1).

(3) For good cause the court shall extend the time period of filing a written objection.

(4) Adjournment. Compliance with this court rule shall be good cause for an adjournment of the trial.

 

Please indicate your vote on the above Motion for Reconsideration and Support of the concept of the proposed rule change by the Supreme Court with the amendments recommended by the Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee and the Criminal Law Section, using the above language.

2.     HB 4844 (Pettalia) Civil procedure; personal protection orders; statewide personal protection order registry; create, and provide for law enforcement information network (LEIN) access. Amends secs. 2950 & 2950a of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.2950 & 600.2950a) & adds sec. 2950n.

MOTION: Oppose.Â

First, the action requires that the issuance of a personal protection order be maintained in the LEIN system for ten years without considering the potential for improper issuance or issuance based upon unreliable or unsubstantiated allegations. This is especially concerning given that many personal protection order are issue ex parte and subsequently terminated following a hearing. The way the amendments are written seem to indicate that even personal protection order terminated in short order would be maintained for the ten year period.

Second, the proposed public registry serves little practical purpose. The purpose of a personal protection order is to protect a specific individual and in some circumstances that individualâs family. There is no judicial finding that the subject of the order is a danger to others thereby requiring some notification beyond the scope of those who requested and received the order.

Third, it has a long-term effect when the matter may only be temporary.Â

 

Please be advised for future reference that an excused absence requires stated justification for your non-attendance by person or by telephone.  i.e.  It is not sufficient for future meetings to just say you cannot attend.  For an excused absence there needs to be a justifiable reason for oneâs non-attendance.  i.e. court, a non-adjournable meeting or appointment, âmandatoryâ preparation for an upcoming trial/hearing, sick, etc.  When reasonably possible it is expected that you adjust your schedule to allow for your attendance at our committee meetings.  If you are only able to attend partially a meeting, it is still expected that you so attend.  The concern, of course, being our need for a quorum to take official action.

 

Carrie A. Sharlow

Administrative Assistant, Governmental Relations

 


State Bar of Michigan

Michael Franck Building

306 Townsend Street

Lansing, MI  48933

P: 517-346-6317  

F: 517-482-6248

 

 

+-----------------------------------------------+

Consider the environment before printing.

E-mail / Fax Notice: The transmitted material is intended only for the use of the addressee. It may contain confidential, proprietary and / or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, in whole or in part, is prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail reply or by phone (800-968-1442), delete the communication and destroy any copies.

E-mail Warning: This e-mail was swept for computer viruses. However, we cannot guarantee that the integrity of this e-mail has been maintained in transmission and do not accept responsibility for the consequences of any virus contamination.

+------------------mail.michbar.org------------------+