People v. Cook

Michigan Supreme Court

People v. Cook

765 N.W.2d 342, 483 Mich. 1023

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedMay 29, 2009

Docket137691

StatusPublished

This text of 765 N.W.2d 342 (People v. Cook) 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 v. Cook, 765 N.W.2d 342, 483 Mich. 1023 (Mich. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Summary Disposition May 29, 2009:

Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration, as on leave granted, of whether 25 points were properly assessed for offense variable 13 (MCL 777.43), and whether the trial court satisfied the provisions of MCL 767.61a when, without objection by the defendant, it reviewed documents but did not call witnesses in determining that the defendant was a sexually delinquent person. 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. Court of Appeals No. 287411.

Weaver, J. I would not remand this case because I am not persuaded that this Court should take action, particularly where it appears that the second issue was not even preserved for appeal. Young, J. I join the statement of Justice WEAVER.

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

Summary Disposition May 29, 2009:

Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration, as on leave granted, of whether 25 points were properly assessed for offense variable 13 (MCL 777.43), and whether the trial court satisfied the provisions of MCL 767.61a when, without objection by the defendant, it reviewed documents but did not call witnesses in determining that the defendant was a sexually delinquent person. 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. Court of Appeals No. 287411.

Weaver, J. I would not remand this case because I am not persuaded that this Court should take action, particularly where it appears that the second issue was not even preserved for appeal. Young, J. I join the statement of Justice WEAVER.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

765 N.W.2d 342, 483 Mich. 1023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cook-mich-2009.