People of Michigan v. Kimberly Ann Arnone

Michigan Supreme Court

People of Michigan v. Kimberly Ann Arnone

DecidedJune 18, 2007

Docket131902

StatusPublished

This text of People of Michigan v. Kimberly Ann Arnone (People of Michigan v. Kimberly Ann Arnone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People of Michigan v. Kimberly Ann Arnone, (Mich. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

June 20, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

131902 & (17) (18) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Robert P. Young, Jr. Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 131902 COA: 271028 Monroe CC: 05-034540-FH KIMBERLY ANN ARNONE, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of March 30, 2007, the prosecuting attorney and the Attorney General were directed to answer the application for leave to appeal the August 7, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we GRANT the defendant’s motion for extension of time to file reply, and we VACATE that portion of the sentence of the Monroe Circuit Court that ordered the defendant to pay attorney fees, and we REMAND this case to the trial court for a decision on attorney fees that considers the defendant’s ability to pay now and in the future. See People v Dunbar, 264 Mich App 240, 252-256 (2004). At the trial court’s discretion, the decision may be made based on the record without the need for a formal evidentiary hearing. If the court decides to order the defendant to pay attorney fees, it shall do so in a separate order, and not the judgment of sentence. Id. at 256; People v Nowicki, 213 Mich App 383, 386-388 (1995). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. June 20, 2007 _________________________________________ s0613 Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

June 20, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

131902 & (17) (18) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Robert P. Young, Jr. Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 131902 COA: 271028 Monroe CC: 05-034540-FH KIMBERLY ANN ARNONE, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of March 30, 2007, the prosecuting attorney and the Attorney General were directed to answer the application for leave to appeal the August 7, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we GRANT the defendant’s motion for extension of time to file reply, and we VACATE that portion of the sentence of the Monroe Circuit Court that ordered the defendant to pay attorney fees, and we REMAND this case to the trial court for a decision on attorney fees that considers the defendant’s ability to pay now and in the future. See People v Dunbar, 264 Mich App 240, 252-256 (2004). At the trial court’s discretion, the decision may be made based on the record without the need for a formal evidentiary hearing. If the court decides to order the defendant to pay attorney fees, it shall do so in a separate order, and not the judgment of sentence. Id. at 256; People v Nowicki, 213 Mich App 383, 386-388 (1995). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. June 20, 2007 _________________________________________ s0613 Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

People of Michigan v. Kimberly Ann Arnone, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-of-michigan-v-kimberly-ann-arnone-mich-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack