People v. Platte
This text of 758 N.W.2d 257 (People v. Platte) 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.
Opinion
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
James Joseph PLATTE, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 2, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to remand is DENIED as moot.
MARILYN J. KELLY, J. (dissenting).
I would grant leave to appeal. Appellate counsel concededly missed the deadlines for filing a motion for a new trial and for a claim of appeal. Counsel also failed to file a motion for a stay or to remand in the Court of Appeals. When counsel filed an application for leave to appeal, it was denied. The Court should reexamine its practice of requiring a defendant to show prejudice in order to have an appeal as of right if counsel has been ineffective, as here. People v. Pickens, 446 Mich. 298, 521 N.W.2d 797 (1994).
Finally, I would grant leave to appeal in this case for the reasons stated in my dissent in People v. Conway, 474 Mich. 1140, 716 N.W.2d 554 (2006).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
758 N.W.2d 257, 482 Mich. 1078, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-platte-mich-2008.