Price v. Court of Appeals

Michigan Supreme Court

Price v. Court of Appeals

225 N.W.2d 364, 393 Mich. 457, 1975 Mich. LEXIS 198

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 24, 1975

DocketDocket 56053

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 225 N.W.2d 364 (Price v. Court of Appeals) 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

Price v. Court of Appeals, 225 N.W.2d 364, 393 Mich. 457, 1975 Mich. LEXIS 198 (Mich. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On March 19, 1971, plaintiff pled guilty to an offense and was sentenced to serve two years’ probation. On June 20, 1973, he was found guilty of violating a condition of his probation and was sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment. He timely petitioned for the appointment of appellate counsel and his request was granted on December 5, 1973. Counsel for plaintiff filed a claim of appeal with the Court of Appeals on January 31, 1974. On February 1, 1974, the Court of Appeals returned the claim of appeal stating that counsel should file an application for leave to appeal.

On March 19, 1974, this Court decided People v Pickett, 391 Mich 305; 215 NW2d 695 (1974), holding that an appeal as of right is available after determination of probation violation and prison sentence, limited to those matters related to thé probation violation and the hearing thereon. Subsequently, counsel again submitted his claim of appeal. On May 29, 1974, the Court of Appeals again returned the claim, stating that it considered Pickett not to be retroactive.

Plaintiff filed this complaint for an order of superintending control directing the Court of Appeals to accept his claim of appeal.

The Court has concluded that People v Pickett is applicable to all cases where an application for *459 leave to appeal or claim of appeal was filed in the Court of Appeals subsequent to March 19, 1974, the date of decision in People v Pickett, and to all cases where an application or claim theretofore filed was pending in the Court of Appeals on that date and to all cases disposed of by the Court of Appeals where a timely application for leave to appeal is now pending in this Court or shall hereafter be filed in this Court.

The order of superintending control shall issue directing the Court of Appeals to accept for filing plaintiffs claim of appeal.

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

Per Curiam.

On March 19, 1971, plaintiff pled guilty to an offense and was sentenced to serve two years’ probation. On June 20, 1973, he was found guilty of violating a condition of his probation and was sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment. He timely petitioned for the appointment of appellate counsel and his request was granted on December 5, 1973. Counsel for plaintiff filed a claim of appeal with the Court of Appeals on January 31, 1974. On February 1, 1974, the Court of Appeals returned the claim of appeal stating that counsel should file an application for leave to appeal.

On March 19, 1974, this Court decided People v Pickett, 391 Mich 305; 215 NW2d 695 (1974), holding that an appeal as of right is available after determination of probation violation and prison sentence, limited to those matters related to thé probation violation and the hearing thereon. Subsequently, counsel again submitted his claim of appeal. On May 29, 1974, the Court of Appeals again returned the claim, stating that it considered Pickett not to be retroactive.

Plaintiff filed this complaint for an order of superintending control directing the Court of Appeals to accept his claim of appeal.

The Court has concluded that People v Pickett is applicable to all cases where an application for *459 leave to appeal or claim of appeal was filed in the Court of Appeals subsequent to March 19, 1974, the date of decision in People v Pickett, and to all cases where an application or claim theretofore filed was pending in the Court of Appeals on that date and to all cases disposed of by the Court of Appeals where a timely application for leave to appeal is now pending in this Court or shall hereafter be filed in this Court.

The order of superintending control shall issue directing the Court of Appeals to accept for filing plaintiffs claim of appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 N.W.2d 364, 393 Mich. 457, 1975 Mich. LEXIS 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/price-v-court-of-appeals-mich-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack